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 .
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claim 32-34 directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372.
This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1.
In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted.
Group I, claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8, 10-12, 17, 21-24, 27, and 29-31, drawn to a system.
Group II, claim(s) 2, drawn to an arrangement.
Group III, claim(s) 32-34, drawn to an adjustment device.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Group I and II lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of a process unit comprising a printing unit and a coating system, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Ng (US 2017/0072463 A1). Ng discloses at least one process unit (¶ [0047] – printhead module 210) and comprises a printing unit (¶ [0048] – first dispenser 304) and a coating system (¶ [0048] – spreader or leveling/smoothing arm 340).
Group I and III lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of an adjustment device comprising an exchangeable process unit including a recoater and a printing module, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Ng (US 2017/0072463 A1). Ng discloses an adjustment device (¶ [0047] – printhead module 210) comprising an exchangeable processing unit (¶ [0035] - each printhead module 210 is removably mounted) comprises a printing unit (¶ [0048] – first dispenser 304) and a coating system (¶ [0048] – spreader or leveling/smoothing arm 340).
Group II and III lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of an adjustment device, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Ng (US 2017/0072463 A1). Ng discloses at least one process unit (¶ [0047] – printhead module 210) and comprises a printing unit (¶ [0048] – first dispenser 304) and a coating system (¶ [0048] – spreader or leveling/smoothing arm 340).
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 32-34 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 3-4, 8, 10-12, 17, 21-24, 27, and 29-31 are examined.
Claim 2 is currently withdrawn in an election with traverse.
Claims 32-34 are withdrawn by original presentation.
Claims 5-7, 9, 13-16, 18-20, 25-26, and 28 are cancelled.
Response to Amendment
The previous objections are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
The amendments to the claims have overcome the previous 35 U.S.C. 102, 103, 112(a) and 112 (b) rejections; however, see the new 35 U.S.C. 103, 112(a), and 112(b) rejections, necessitated by amendment.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“adjustment device” in claim 1
“control unit” in claim 12
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Regarding the limitation “adjustment device” in claim 1, the “adjustment device” claims a generic placeholder “device” performing the functions “adjustment for offline preparation of the process unit.” However, the generic placeholder “device” is not modified by the function “adjustment for offline preparation of the process unit before it is installed in the manufacturing device” to provide sufficient structure. For examination purposes, “adjustment device” will be interpreted in line with the instant specification in ¶ [074] as “a specially designed device. Such device can, for example, be provided with integrated measuring equipment, which allows the process unit to be set up, measured and, if necessary, readjusted in an installation situation simulating the machine” and “the adjustment device can, for example, be equipped with suitable guide elements…., in order to move the measuring head in the X and Y directions along the process unit.”
Regarding the limitation “a control unit,” the limitation claims a generic placeholder “unit” performing the function “control,” but the generic placeholder is not modified by the function to provide sufficient structure. The limitation will be interpreted in line with the instant specification in ¶ [025], [076], and [078] as “said line sensor is connected to another process and control unit in order to enable a direct correction of the process factors” and “if this (IR) sensor is then connected to the air conditioner via a process and control unit, in-line closed-loop thermal management could take place.”
Further Claim Interpretation
The limitation “measuring head” in claim 22 and 30 will be interpreted in line with the instant specification in ¶ [074] as “an electronic device so that the measurement data can be automatically entered into a log”.
Regarding claim 3, 4, 10, 24, for examination purposes, the phrase “optionally” and the limitations following will be read as not being required and are not part of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 24, 29, and 31, the phrase “and/or” will be interpreted as “or”.
Claim Objections
Claim 11-12 and 21-22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
claim 11, line 1 – “the at least one” before “each of the exchangeable process units” should be deleted for clarity
claim 11, line 4 – “the at least one process unit” should read “each of the process units” for clarity
claim 12, last line – “a control unit” should read “the control unit” to recite to “control unit in line 4
claim 21, line 4 – “the at least one process unit” should read “each of the process units” for clarity
claim 22, line 2 – add “the” before “exchangeable process unit” for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 23-24, and 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites “an adjustment device for offline preparation when the process unit is outside the manufacturing device, the adjustment device is separate from the manufacturing device, and the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models”. The examiner could not find support for the limitations in the originally filed disclosure. The instant specification mentions “adjustment device for offline preparation of the process unit” in ¶ [020-021], [071], [074], [0148], [0180], and [0187]. The instant specification in ¶ [074] and [0180-0181] disclose the adjustment device as “a specially designed device”. However, the disclosure does not disclose that the adjustment device is outside and separate from a manufacturing device. The “adjustment device” could be contained in the 3D printer (“manufacturing device”) and still be free of “a construction field” at an end of the 3D printer. Fig. 4 depicts the adjustment device, but does not depict the adjustment device is outside and separate from the manufacturing device and only supports that the adjustment device is “free of a construction field” as recited in ¶ [0180]. Regarding the limitation “the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models”, claim 23 ultimately depends on claim 1, which claims where layer by layer formation of moldings is fundamentally the same as “printing 3D models”. In ¶ [037] of the originally filed specification, a “molded article” or “part” or “3D molding” or “3D part” in the sense of the disclosure means all three-dimensional object manufactured by means of 3D printing methods and exhibiting dimensional stability. From the disclosure, the invention is directed to printing 3D moldings or models; therefore, the disclosure does not have support that the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models. The instant specification in ¶ [074] and [0180-0181] disclose the adjustment device as “a specially designed device”, but does not disclose that the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models. Fig. 4 depicts the adjustment device, but does not depict nor support the limitation the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models.
As claims 24 and 27 depend on claim 23, claims 24 and 27 are rejected for failing to comply with the written description requirement for introducing new matter.
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.
Claim 1, 3-4, 8, 10-12, 17, 21-24, 27, and 29-31 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "an adjustment device including an exchangeable process unit" in line 7. The claim recites “an exchangeable process unit” in the line 4, but it is unclear if “an exchangeable process unit” is reciting to “an exchangeable process unit” in line 4, or a separate “exchangeable process unit”, rendering the limitation indefinite. For examination purposes, the limitation will be read as reciting to “exchangeable process unit” in line 4.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "any construction field" in line 10. The claim recites “a construction field” in the line 3, but it is unclear if “any construction field” is reciting to “a construction field” in line 3, or a separate “construction field”, rendering the limitation indefinite. For examination purposes, the limitation will be read as reciting to “a construction field” in line 3 and in line with the instant specification in ¶ [038].
As claims 3-4, 8, 10-12, 17, 21-24, 27, and 29-31 ultimately depend on claim 1, claims 3-4, 8, 10-12, 17, 21-24, 27, and 29-31 are rejected for indefiniteness.
Claim 31 recites the limitation "the printing device" in the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the limitation will be read as reciting to “a manufacturing device” in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8, 10-11, 22-24, 27 and 29-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gaylo (US 2004/0005182 A1) in view of Ng et al., henceforth Ng (US 2017/0072463 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Gaylo discloses a system (¶ [0086] – three-dimensional printing machine 100) comprising:
i) a manufacturing device (¶ [0086] – three-dimensional printing machine 100; Fig. 3 depicts a section of 100 as the “manufacturing device”) for the layer by layer formation of moldings from a particulate material (¶ [0004] – successive layers of powder onto a substrate), wherein the manufacturing device includes a construction field (¶ [0097] – second powder bed assembly 300 comprising a build bed 302) and a exchangeable (¶ [0146] – removable plate assembly 504; 504 allows quick changeout of micro-valves for replacement) process unit (¶ [0141] – printhead assembly 500 incorporates 504);
ii) an adjustment device (¶ [0086] – three-dimensional printing machine 100; FIG. 3 depicts a section of 100 as the “adjustment device”) including an exchangeable process unit (504), for offline preparation of the exchangeable process unit (¶ [0146] – 504 allows quick changeout of micro-valves for cleaning them off-line) and to reduce downtime of the manufacturing device (interpreted as intended use), wherein the adjustment device is free of any construction field (FIG. 3 depicts “adjustment device” is free of 300 of “manufacturing device”); wherein each of the exchangeable process units comprises a recoater (¶ [0092] – roller 400) and printing modules having nozzles (¶ [0048] - printhead module 210 comprises a first dispenser 304)
PNG
media_image1.png
691
922
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gaylo Fig. 3
The limitation “for offline preparation of the exchangeable process unit and to reduce downtime of the manufacturing device” recites a manner of operating the device for an intended use. A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114 (II).
As Gaylo discloses removable plate assembly 504 allows quick changeout of micro-valves for replacement or for cleaning them off-line (¶ [0146]), the removable plate assembly is capable of performing the intended use of “for offline preparation of the process unit and to reduce downtime of the manufacturing device.” The limitation does not add further structure to the claimed apparatus and thus because the removable plate assembly in Gaylo is capable of performing the intended use, it meets the limitations as claimed.
Gaylo does not disclose wherein each of the exchangeable process units comprises a recoater connected to a printing module having nozzles.
Ng discloses an additive manufacturing system 100 (¶ [0031]) comprising a layer of feed material on platen 105 (¶ [0032]) and printhead platform 150 configured to carry one or more printhead modules 210, each printhead module 210 is removably mounted (¶ [0035]).
Ng further discloses wherein each of the exchangeable process units (150) comprises a recoater (¶ [0048] - a first spreader 340 disperses/smooths deposited feed material) connected to printing modules having nozzles (¶ [0048] - printhead module 210 comprises a first dispenser 304, 340 follows 304)
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a dispenser and a spreader in Ng to the removable plate assembly, nozzles, and roller in Gaylo to have the roller follow the nozzle and disperse/smooth the deposited feed material evenly across the platen (¶ [0048]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo discloses the manufacturing device includes a receptacle (¶ [0124] – second powder bed assembly 302) for an exchangeable construction container (¶ [0124] – may be removed and replaced).
Regarding claim 4, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo does not disclose a dynamic filling system including a feed container for filling the recoater of the exchangeable processing unit in the manufacturing device.
Ng discloses a dynamic filling system (¶ [0059] – dispenser 304 comprises conduit 505) including a feed container (¶ [0059] – coupled to a hopper 520 stores feed material) for filling the recoater (¶ [0060] – from which the feed material 314 can be dispensed onto the platen; ¶ [0048] - a first spreader 340 disperses/smooths deposited feed material) of the exchangeable processing unit in the manufacturing device. As Ng discloses the dispenser 304 dispenses feed material from a conduit 505 and hopper 520, it “dynamically fills” the platen 105.
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the conduit coupled to a hopper in Ng to the printhead assembly in Gaylo regulate the rate of flow of feed material by a controller (¶ [0060]).
The limitation “dynamic filling” recites a manner of operating the device for an intended use. See MPEP 2114 (II).
As Ng discloses a first dispenser comprising a conduit and hopper, the dispenser is capable of performing the intended use of “dynamic filling.” The limitation does not add further structure to the claimed apparatus and thus because the dispensers in Ng are capable of performing the intended use, it meets the limitations as claimed.
Regarding claim 8, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo discloses the recoater is a bidirectional recoater (¶ [0095] – first carriage 126 to controllably move the first carriage – and with it the roller – back and forth).
Gaylo does not disclose the exchangeable process unit comprises the recoater.
Ng discloses each of the exchangeable process units comprises a recoater (¶ [0048] - a first spreader 340) and the recoater is a bidirectional recoater (¶ [0046] – additive manufacturing process is bi-directional; therefore, spreader 340 is a “bidirectional recoater”).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a dispenser and a spreader in Ng to the removable plate assembly, nozzles, and roller in Gaylo to have the roller follow the nozzle and disperse/smooth the deposited feed material evenly across the platen (¶ [0048]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo further discloses a digital camera or an IR camera (¶ [0185] - an IR temperature sensing device 624).
Gaylo does not disclose each of the exchangeable process unit comprises a digital camera or an IR camera.
Ng discloses each of the exchangeable process units comprises a digital camera (¶ [0051] - 210 comprises a metrology system 352 comprises a profilometer, a thermal imager, or an optical camera).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a metrology system comprising a thermal imager, or an optical camera in Ng to the removable plate assembly and IR temperature sensing device in Gaylo to measure the surface roughness of the deposited feed materials and knowing the roughness of deposited feed material before fusing/melting the feed materials to help in improving the quality in the process (¶ [0051]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo discloses first carriage 126 to controllably move the first carriage – and with it the roller – back and forth (¶ [0095]).
Gaylo does not disclose the at least one each of the exchangeable process units applies particulate material to the construction field while traveling in a forward direction and while traveling in a reverse direction, wherein the at least one process unit includes a pair of digital cameras, a pair of line scan cameras, or a pair of IR cameras, wherein one of the pair is mounted in each of the forward and reverse directions of travel.
Ng discloses the at least one each of the exchangeable process units applies particulate material (¶ [0048] - 210 comprises a first dispenser 304 that deposits a first feed material 314; ¶ [0050] – feed material is powder) to the construction field (¶ [0035] - 210 move across the platen 105) while traveling in a forward direction and while traveling in a reverse direction (¶ [0046] – additive manufacturing process is bi-directional), wherein the at least one process unit includes a pair of digital cameras or a pair of IR cameras (¶ [0051] - a metrology system 352, which can comprise one or more of a profilometer, a thermal imager, or an optical camera; ¶ [0057] - 210 comprises a second metrology system 350), wherein one of the pair is mounted in each of the forward and reverse directions of travel (interpreted as intended use).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a dispenser that deposits powder and a metrology system comprising a thermal imager, or an optical camera in Ng to the removable plate assembly and IR temperature sensing device in Gaylo to measure the surface roughness of the deposited feed materials and knowing the roughness of deposited feed material before fusing/melting the feed materials to help in improving the quality in the process (¶ [0051]).
Regarding the limitation “the process unit applies particulate material to a construction field while traveling in a forward direction and while traveling in a reverse direction” and “one of the pair is mounted in each of the forward and reverse directions of travel” recites a manner of operating the device for an intended use. See MPEP 2114 (II).
As Ng discloses the printhead modules moves bi-directionally (¶ [0046]) and metrology systems are arranged towards the leading edge and towards the trailing edge of the printhead module (FIG. 3), the printhead module and metrology systems are capable of performing the intended use of “forward and reverse directions of travel.” The limitation does not add further structure to the claimed apparatus and thus because the metrology systems in Ng are capable of performing the intended use, it meets the limitations as claimed.
Regarding claim 22, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo discloses the adjustment device includes a measuring head for measuring exchangeable process unit in the adjustment device (¶ [0157] – 500 is moved to desired position, preferably by a computer-controlled motion control system, moves second carriage 128 – and with it 500).
In arguendo Gaylo does not disclose a measuring head, Ng is applied.
Ng also discloses the adjustment device includes a measuring head (¶ [0043] – printing component 220, 222 can be a global metrology system that can measure various parameters associated with the additive manufacturing process, comprise of a sensor, a thermal imager or an optical camera) for measuring the process unit (¶ [0044] – measure various parameters to control 210).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a metrology system comprising a thermal imager, or an optical camera in Ng to the plate and IR temperature sensing device in Gaylo to measure the surface roughness of the deposited feed materials and knowing the roughness of deposited feed material before fusing/melting the feed materials to help in improving the quality in the process (¶ [0051]).
Regarding claim 23, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 22.
Gaylo discloses wherein the adjustment device is for offline preparation of the process unit when the process unit is outside of the manufacturing device (FIG. 3 above depicts 500 in an “adjustment device” that is outside of a “manufacturing device” comprising 300), the adjustment device is separate from the manufacturing device (FIG. 3 above depicts 500 in the “adjustment device” is separate of the “manufacturing device”); and the adjustment device is not a device for printing 3D models (FIG. 3 above an “adjustment device” cannot be used to print a 3D model in “manufacturing device” comprising 300).
Gaylo discloses the adjustment device includes a measuring head (¶ [0157] – 500 is moved to desired position, preferably by a computer-controlled motion control system, moves second carriage 128 – and with it 500).
Gaylo does not disclose the measuring head is movable along an X and Y direction along the exchangeable process unit in the adjustment device.
Ng discloses the measuring head is movable along a Y direction along the exchangeable process unit in the adjustment device (¶ [0039] – rails 130a, 130b; 150 moves along y direction on gantry 130; ¶ [0043] – printing component 220, 222 can be a global metrology system that can measure various parameters associated with the additive manufacturing process, comprise of a sensor, a thermal imager or an optical camera).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the rails and gantry that moves printhead module comprising a metrology system comprising a thermal imager, or an optical camera in Ng to the removable plate assembly and IR temperature sensing device in Gaylo to allow printhead assembly to traverse over the bed (¶ [0039]) and measure the surface roughness of the deposited feed materials and knowing the roughness of deposited feed material before fusing/melting the feed materials to help in improving the quality in the process (¶ [0051]).
Ng discloses, in another embodiment, printhead platform 750 supports a printhead module 710 (¶ [0067]). The printhead module 710 is considered the same as printhead module 210.
Ng further discloses the measuring head is movable along an X direction along the exchangeable process unit in the adjustment device (¶ [0067] - printhead module 710 is mounted on a track 730 of 750; can move along the tracks in the x direction).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to apply the track to the printhead platform and printhead module in Ng to removeable plate assembly in Gaylo to position the module in the system in the x direction (¶ [0067]).
Regarding claim 24, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 23.
Gaylo and Ng do not explicitly disclose the measuring head moves on guide elements having a flatness of +/- 0.02 mm over an entire travel range of the measuring head.
However, as depicted in Fig. 3 of Gaylo, carriage 128 of Gaylo is depicted as level with the powder bed assembly 300 and moves printhead assembly 500 parallel to 300. Also, as depicted in Fig. 1A and 3 of Ng, the gantry 130 is depicted as level with the platen 105 and moves the printhead module parallel to the platen.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the gantry and track (guide elements) with a flatness of ±0.02 mm so the printhead module can move parallel to the platen and in the x- and y-directions.
Regarding claim 27, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 24.
Gaylo discloses quick-release closures (¶ [0146] – removable plate assembly allows quick changeout) used for positioning the exchangeable process units in the manufacturing device and in the adjustment device (¶ [0146] –changeout of micro-valves for replacement or for cleaning them off-line).
Regarding claim 29, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the adjustment device includes a quick-release closure (¶ [0146] – removable plate assembly allows quick changeout of micro-valves for replacement or for cleaning them off-line).
Regarding claim 30, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo discloses the adjustment device includes a measuring head (¶ [0157] – 500 is moved to desired position, preferably by a computer-controlled motion control system, moves second carriage 128 – and with it 500).
Gaylo does not disclose the adjustment device includes an X-Y guide for moving a measuring head in an X direction and a Y direction, wherein the X-Y guide is below the exchangeable process unit.
Ng discloses the adjustment device includes a guide (¶ [0039] – rails 130a, 130b) for moving a measuring head in a Y direction (¶ [0039] – 150 moves along y direction on gantry 130; ¶ [0043] – printing component 220, 222 can be a global metrology system that can measure various parameters associated with the additive manufacturing process, comprise of a sensor, a thermal imager or an optical camera).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the rails and gantry that moves printhead module comprising a metrology system comprising a thermal imager, or an optical camera in Ng to the removable plate assembly and IR temperature sensing device in Gaylo to allow printhead assembly to traverse over the bed (¶ [0039]) and measure the surface roughness of the deposited feed materials and knowing the roughness of deposited feed material before fusing/melting the feed materials to help in improving the quality in the process (¶ [0051]).
Ng discloses, in another embodiment, printhead platform 750 supports a printhead module 710 (¶ [0067]). The printhead module 710 is considered the same as printhead module 210.
Ng further discloses a guide (¶ [0067] - printhead module 710 is mounted on a track 730 of 750) for moving a measuring head (220, 222 of 710) in an X direction (¶ [0067] - can move along the tracks in the x direction), wherein the guide is below the exchangeable process unit (FIG. 7 depicts 730 below 710).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to apply the track to the printhead platform and printhead module in Ng to removeable plate assembly in Gaylo to position the module in the system in the x direction (¶ [0067]).
Regarding claim 31, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Modified Gaylo does not explicitly disclose a transport box for storing and/or transporting one of the process units when the process unit is ready for immediate use in the printing device.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a box to store and transport the printing assembly, nozzles, and other parts of the machine.
Claim(s) 12, 17, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaylo (US 2004/0005182 A1) in view of Ng (US 2017/0072463 A1), as applied to claim 1, in view of Abels (WO 2017/202818 A1, an English machine translation was provided in a previous Office Action) and Buller et al., henceforth Buller (US 2018/0001557 A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 1.
Gaylo discloses the manufacturing device includes a receptacle (¶ [0124] – second powder bed assembly 302) for an exchangeable construction container (¶ [0124] – may be removed and replaced). The easy replaceability of the powder bed assembly permits easy changeover from one materials system to another (¶ [0124]).
Ng discloses the manufacturing device includes an air conditioner (¶ [0031] – gas enters through gas inlet 103 and removed through outlet 104 to maintain gas environment) and a control unit is connected to the air conditioner (¶ [0036] – controller 190 controls additive manufacturing process; ¶ [0031] – control the gas supply to maintain a desired gas environment).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the controller and gas supply in Ng to the machine in Gaylo to control the gas supply to maintain a desired gas environment (¶ [0031]).
Gaylo does not disclose wherein each of the exchangeable process units includes a line sensor in an area between the recoater and the printing module, wherein the line sensor is connected to a control unit
Ng discloses a sensor (¶ [0051] – metrology system 352) is provided in an area between the recoater (340, 341) and the printing module (304, 305) (Fig. 3 depicts 352 is arranged in between the dispensers 304, 305 and spreader or arms 340, 341), wherein the sensor is connected to a control unit (190) (¶ [0036] – controller 190 controls additive manufacturing process; ¶ [0044] – measurements are fed to a controller 190).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a metrology system comprising a thermal imager, or an optical camera in Ng to the removable plate assembly and IR temperature sensing device in Gaylo to measure the surface roughness of the deposited feed materials and knowing the roughness of deposited feed material before fusing/melting the feed materials to help in improving the quality in the process (¶ [0051]).
Modified Gaylo does not disclose a line sensor.
Analogous art Abels discloses a device for process monitoring in the generative production of components by layer-by-layer solidification of building material using energetic radiation, in which a radiation-sensitive sensor arrangement is used to record at least one data for the before and/or after applying a new layer of the building material (line 13, 21-25).
Abels further discloses a line sensor (line 223-234 – at least one line sensor as a radiation-sensitive sensor arrangement). The advantage to using a line sensor is the ability to arrange the line sensor at a very short distance above the processing surface and can be moved synchronously with the layer application without causing a collision or interference with the application of a new layer, which results in a very high resolution of data and image (line 268-278). Additionally, the radiation-sensitive sensor arrangement comprising the line sensor makes it possible to record data without the influence of process emissions, which results in no additional waiting/non-productive time for data recording (line 278-287).
Gaylo and Abels disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the line sensor in Abels to the metrology system in modified Gaylo because the line sensor has an advantage of being arranged at a very short distance above the processing surface and can be moved synchronously with the layer application without causing a collision or interference with the application of a new layer, which results in a very high resolution of data and image (line 268-278) and makes it possible to record data without the influence of process emissions, which results in no additional waiting/non-productive time for data recording (line 278-287).
Gaylo and Ng do not recite an automatic feeder for the construction container.
Analogous art Buller discloses a build module (construction container) is separable from the 3D printing system (¶ [0178]). The 3D printing system comprises multiple build modules 201, 202, 203 with at least one build module engaging with the processing chamber to expand the interior volume of the processing chamber 210 (¶ [0181]).
Buller further discloses an automatic feeder (¶ [0181] – autonomous guided vehicle (AGV)) for the construction container (¶ [0181] – for positioning of the build module relative to the processing chamber).
Gaylo and Buller disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the AGV and exchangeable build modules in Buller to the receptacles in modified Gaylo to expand the interior volume of the processing chamber and position the build module (¶ [0181]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 12.
Gaylo does not disclose limitations of claim 17.
Ng discloses the recoater is a bidirectional recoater (¶ [0046] – additive manufacturing process is bi-directional; therefore, spreader 340 is a “bidirectional recoater”) and the process unit (150) includes the printing module (304) and a second printing module (305) (¶ [0048]-[0049] – first dispenser 304 and second dispenser 305) one (304) attached to a first side of the bidirectional recoater (340) and the other (305) attached to an opposing side of the bidirectional recoater (340) (Fig. 3 depicts the first dispenser 304 and second dispenser 305 are attached on different sides of the spreader 340).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a first and second dispenser and a spreader arranged as described above in Ng to the removable plate assembly, nozzles, and roller in Gaylo to have the roller follow the nozzle and disperse/smooth the deposited feed material evenly across the platen (¶ [0048]).
Regarding claim 21, modified Gaylo discloses the system of claim 17.
Gaylo discloses first carriage 126 to controllably move the first carriage – and with it the roller – back and forth (¶ [0095]).
Gaylo does not disclose each of the exchangeable process units applies particulate material to the construction field while traveling in a forward direction and while traveling in a reverse direction, wherein the at least one process unit includes a pair of digital cameras, a pair of line scan cameras, or a pair of IR cameras, wherein one of the pair is mounted in each of the forward and reverse directions of travel.
Ng discloses each of the exchangeable process units applies particulate material (¶ [0048] - 210 comprises a first dispenser 304 that deposits a first feed material 314; ¶ [0050] – feed material is powder) to the construction field (¶ [0035] - 210 move across the platen 105) while traveling in a forward direction and while traveling in a reverse direction (¶ [0046] – additive manufacturing process is bi-directional), wherein the at least one process unit includes a pair of digital cameras or a pair of IR cameras (¶ [0051] - a metrology system 352, which can comprise one or more of a profilometer, a thermal imager, or an optical camera; ¶ [0057] - 210 comprises a second metrology system 350), wherein one of the pair is mounted in each of the forward and reverse directions of travel (interpreted as intended use).
Gaylo and Ng disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the printhead module comprising a dispenser that deposits powder and a metrology system comprising a thermal imager, or an optical camera in Ng to the removable plate assembly and IR temperature sensing device in Gaylo to measure the surface roughness of the deposited feed materials and knowing the roughness of deposited feed material before fusing/melting the feed materials to help in improving the quality in the process (¶ [0051]).
Regarding the limitation “the process unit applies particulate material to a construction field while traveling in a forward direction and while traveling in a reverse direction” and “one of the pair is mounted in each of the forward and reverse directions of travel” recites a manner of operating the device for an intended use. See MPEP 2114 (II).
As Ng discloses the printhead modules moves bi-directionally (¶ [0046]) and metrology systems are arranged towards the leading edge and towards the trailing edge of the printhead module (FIG. 3), the printhead module and metrology systems are capable of performing the intended use of “forward and reverse directions of travel.” The limitation does not add further structure to the claimed apparatus and thus because the metrology systems in Ng are capable of performing the intended use, it meets the limitations as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remaining arguments filed October 20, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the instant disclosure provides support for “outside the manufacturing device, … and is separate from the manufacturing device”, pointing to ¶ [0089-0090, 0181-0186] and “the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models” in ¶ [0021].
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites “an adjustment device for offline preparation when the process unit is outside the manufacturing device, the adjustment device is separate from the manufacturing device, and the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models”.
¶ [0089-0090] of the instant specification discusses “changing or exchanging, an exchangeable process unit … into or out of a 3D printing device” and “to simply exchange several process unit quickly and easily”. ¶ [0181-0186] of the instant specification discusses “a transport box” and “offline adjustment of the process unit in the adjustment device”. The paragraphs do not describe an “adjustment device” being “outside the manufacturing device” and “separate from the manufacturing device”. Furthermore, Gaylo and Ng both discuss change and exchanging a “process unit” (Gaylo ¶ [0146] – 504 allows quick changeout of micro-valves for cleaning them off-line; Ng ¶ [0035] - printhead platform 150 configured to carry one or more printhead modules 210, each printhead module 210 is removably mounted). Therefore, the disclosure does not have support of “an adjustment device for offline preparation when the process unit is outside the manufacturing device, the adjustment device is separate from the manufacturing device.”
Regarding the limitation “the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models”, claim 23 ultimately depends on claim 1, which claims where layer by layer formation of moldings is fundamentally the same as “printing 3D models”. ¶ [021] of the instant specification describes “an arrangement for layer-by-layer formation of moldings … which comprises at least one process unit which can be guided to and installed in the arrangement, said process unit comprising a printing unit and a coating system, and an adjustment device for offline preparation of the process unit”. Although “an adjustment device for offline preparation of the process unit” does not necessarily show that it is a “3D printer”, it also does not exclude it from not being a “3D printer” and does not explicitly state the negative limitation. Therefore, the disclosure does not have support that the adjustment device is not a manufacturing device for printing 3D models.
Applicant argues amended claim 1 is not taught by the prior art of record.
The argument is addressed in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of amended claim 1 over Gaylo in view of Ng above, necessitated by amendment.
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 JONATHAN B WOO whose telephone number is (571)272-5191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Susan Leong can be reached on (571) 270-1487. 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.
/JONATHAN B WOO/Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754