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 .
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.
Claims 4, 6, and 19 are 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 4, the limitation “a projection optical system configured to enlarge or reduce, on said first axis, the light beam modulated by said spatial light modulator, and cause the light beam after enlargement or reduction to enter M lenses out of the N lenses of said lens array, where M is a variable number satisfying 1≤ M ≤ N” is lacking support in specification. The specification is silent about this limitation. Therefore, this limitation is a new matter.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “the controller is configured to limit M to be an odd number when N is an odd number, and limit M to be an even number when N is an even number” is lacking support in specification. The specification is silent about this limitation. Therefore, this limitation is a new matter.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “said image rotator is provided at a preceding stage of said galvanometer mirror” is lacking support in specification. The specification is silent about this limitation. Therefore, this limitation is a 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.
Claims 1-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “said splitting optical system includes: a plurality of lens arrays; and an afocal reduction optical system having said plurality of lens arrays” is indefinite. 1) It is unclear whether the term “a plurality of lens arrays” is same as the plurality of lens arrays in line 7. 2) it is unclear whether term “said plurality of lens arrays” refers to the term “a plurality of lens arrays” in line 7 or line 13.
For the purpose of examination, the splitting optical system is interpreted to be including an focal reduction optical system having a plurality of lens arrays. All of the “plurality of lens arrays” in the claim are the same plurality of lens arrays.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “said splitting optical system includes an afocal reduction optical system having a plurality of lens arrays” is indefinite. It is unclear whether the term “a plurality of lens arrays” is same as the plurality of lens arrays in claim 4.
For the purpose of examination, the “plurality of lens arrays” in the claim are the same plurality of lens arrays in claim 4.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “said lens array is a single lens array, and said splitting optical system includes said single lens array” is indefinite. 1) It is unclear whether the term “said lens array” is same as the plurality of lens arrays in claim 4.
For the purpose of examination, the “said lens array” in the claim are the same plurality of lens arrays in claim 4.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “a projection optical system configured to enlarge or reduce, on said first axis, the light beam modulated by said spatial light modulator, and cause the light beam after enlargement or reduction to enter M lenses out of the N lenses of said lens array, where M is a variable number satisfying 1≤ M ≤ N” is indefinite. The M lenses is not positively cited as a part of the claimed invention. It is unclear whether the M lenses is a part of the invention.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “the light beam after the enlargement or reduction is incident on a smaller number of lenses” is indefinite. It is unclear the small number of lenses are the same as the M lenses in claim 4, since claim 4 discloses “the light beam after the enlargement or reduction is incident on the M lenses”.
Regarding claims 6, the limitation “the controller is configured to limit M to be an odd number when N is an odd number, and limit M to be an even number when N is an even number” is indefinite. It is unclear how the controller can set the number M and N, since M and N are the number of lenses of said lens arrays, which are fix or predetermined numbers in a finished apparatus.
Regarding claims 19, the limitation “said image rotator is provided at a preceding stage of said galvanometer mirror” is indefinite. Since claim 18 discloses “said image rotator is provided at a stage subsequent to said galvanometer mirror”, hence this limitation in claim 19 is contradict with claim 18. The location of the image rotator is unclear.
Regarding claims 2-17, and 20, the claims are rejected due to their dependency on an indefinite claim as shown above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 13-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Nagano (JP 2003340924) (cited in IDS).
PNG
media_image1.png
814
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
-
PNG
media_image2.png
450
350
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
340
710
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
246
630
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Nagano teaches a 3-dimensional shaping apparatus (See fig.28) that manufactures a 3-dimensional shaped object, the apparatus comprising:
a beam irradiation unit (illumination device 144) configured to emit a light beam (see para.[0134] “an illumination device 144 that irradiates laser light onto the DMD 50”), said beam irradiation unit including a light source and a lens for relaying the light beam from said light source (See para.[0023] “ As a laser apparatus used for said layered manufacturing apparatus, what irradiates a laser beam with a wavelength of 350-450 nm is preferable. For example, by using a GaN-based semiconductor laser as the semiconductor laser.” It is inherent that a GaN-based semiconductor laser includes a light source and a lens.);
a spatial light modulator (DMD 50) configured to spatially modulate the light beam emitted by said beam irradiation unit on at least a first axis (see fig.31);
a splitting optical system (microlens array 472) including at least one lens array (microlens array 472) having a plurality of lenses (microlenses 474) arranged along said first axis and configured to split the light beam modulated by said spatial light modulator into a plurality of light beams by said lens array (See fig.31); and
a galvanometer mirror(box-shaped scanner 162 and galvanometer mirror in fig.29) configured to scan the shaping material with the plurality of light beams from said splitting optical system [see para.[0032] “Therefore, as the scanner 162 moves, a strip-shaped exposed area (sintered area) 170 is formed on the surface of the powder 152 for each exposure head 166”, and para.[0064] “In each exposure head 166 of the scanner 162, the laser beams B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, and B7 emitted in a diverging state from each of the GaN-based semiconductor lasers LD1 to LD7 that constitute the combined laser light source of the fiber array light source 66 are collimated by the corresponding collimator lenses 11 to 17”.],wherein
said splitting optical system includes: a plurality of lens arrays (microlens array 472); and an afocal reduction optical system having said plurality of lens arrays (microlens array 472).
Regarding claim 13, Nagano teaches said lens array (microlenses 474) of said splitting optical system is provided at a focal point of an immediately preceding optical system (See fig.31).
Regarding claim 14, Nagano teaches an aperture portion (aperture array 476) having a plurality of openings (aperture array 476) through which the plurality of light beams split by said lens array pass.
Regarding claim 15, Nagano teaches said spatial light modulator includes a plurality of modulation element groups arranged along at least said first axis, each of said plurality of modulation element groups includes a plurality of spatial modulation elements (spatial modulation elements; see the annotation of fig.8), and intensity distributions of said plurality of light beams are respectively controlled by said plurality of modulation element groups (see para.[0114] “[Light intensity distribution correction optical system] In the above embodiment, the exposure head uses a light intensity distribution correction optical system consisting of a pair of compound lenses. This light intensity distribution correction optical system changes the light beam width at each exit position so that the ratio of the light beam width at the periphery to the light beam width at the center near the optical axis is smaller on the exit side than on the entrance side, and corrects the light intensity distribution so that it is approximately uniform on the irradiated surface when a parallel light beam from the light source is irradiated onto the DMD. The operation of this light intensity distribution correction optical system will now be described.”).
PNG
media_image5.png
474
704
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
10
8
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
10
8
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
10
8
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Nagano teaches said spatial light modulator (spatial modulation elements) includes a plurality of spatial modulation elements arrayed two-dimensionally (see fig.8).
Regarding claim 17, Nagano teaches said spatial light modulator (spatial modulation elements) modulates the light beam from said beam irradiation unit such that intensity of the light beam incident on a boundary of said plurality of lenses of said lens array of said splitting optical system is smaller than intensity of the light beam incident on a center of each of said plurality of lenses [Examiner’s note: spatial light modulator is capable to modulate the intensity of the light beam. Therefore the spatial light modulator of Nagano is capable to modular the intensity of the light beam on the boundary to be smaller than the intensity of the light beam on the center.]
Regarding claim 20, Nagano teaches an array direction of the plurality of light beams on said shaping material obliquely intersects a scanning direction of the plurality of light beams by said galvanometer mirror, and the plurality of light beams are respectively positioned in a plurality of consecutive scanning lines (see figures) [Examiner’s note: This is an intended function of the 3-dimesional shaping apparatus. Operator can manipulate the apparatus to irradiate the material obliquely intersects a scanning direction.].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 is allowed.
Response to Amendment
With respect to the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), applicant amended claims 1, 3, 5,6, 15 and 18-19 filed on 12/26/2025, which overcomes the claim rejection. Therefore the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn. However, new claim rejection are raised due to the claim amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues reference Nagano does not teach the newly added limitation “an afocal reduction optical system having said plurality of lens arrays”.
Examiner respectfully disagree, because the claim amendment just repeat some limitation already in the previous claim, which is a splitting optical system including at least one lens array. Reference Nagano teaches the microlens array 472 that read on the claim limitation. Therefore, the rejection is respectfully maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRIS Q LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-8241. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/CHRIS Q LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761