DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In view of the amendment filed 01/08/2026:
Claims 1-6 are pending.
Claims 7-11 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Claims 12 and 13 are cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talgorn
(US20180126620), and further in view of Van Os et al. (US20180356080).
Regarding claim 1, Talgorn teaches a method for producing a 3D item by means of fused
deposition modelling ([0029] the invention provides a method for manufacturing a 3D object, especially a fused deposition modeling method for manufacturing a 3D object), the method
comprising a 3D printing stage comprising layer-wise depositing 3D printable material, using a
printer nozzle (printer nozzle 502 in Figure 1), to provide the 3D item comprising 3D printed
material ([0029] wherein the method comprises the steps of: depositing a material from a
printer nozzle on a support structure while translating the support structure and the printer
nozzle relative to each other with a translation speed in a translation direction; see layers of
filament 320 being deposited on support structure 550 to form 3D object 10 in Figure 1),
wherein the 3D item comprises a plurality of layers of 3D printed material (see 3D object 1 comprising layers of filament 320 in Figure 1), wherein the plurality of layers comprises a stack, wherein the stack comprises a first layer and a second layer (see adjacent printed layers in Figure 4),
wherein the method comprises:
3D printing the first layer and subsequently the second layer while providing a regular
pattern comprising a plurality of modulations in a z-direction in each of the first and second
layers, by moving the printer nozzle or printing stage in the z-direction ([0057] and Figure 4),
the z-direction being the direction in which the layers are 3D printed on top of each other (see
z-direction in Figure 4).
While Talgorn fails to explicitly teach a plurality of openings are defined between the
first and second layers in the z-direction, the regular patterns being identical but translated
relative to another along a stack axis (SA) of one of the first and second layers, Talgorn teaches
another embodiment where layers are translated relative to one another along a stack axis
(Figure 5C). Further, Talgorn notes that a combination of embodiments can be used for one’s advantage ([0064] It should be noted that the above-mentioned embodiments illustrate rather
than limit the invention, and that those skilled in the art will be able to design many alternative
embodiments without departing from the scope of the appended claims… The mere fact that
certain measures are recited in mutually different dependent claims does not indicate that a
combination of these measures cannot be used to advantage) and that voids can be formed to
achieve local optical effects ([0058] Variations of the surface as well as the adherence, or
mechanical connection, between adjacently printed materials may be induced, and/or voids
can be formed that will induce scattering or even a sparkling effect. In this way (local) optical
effects can be achieved), prompting one of ordinary skill to look to related art for configurations
that combine the embodiments.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to lighting devices, Van Os teaches a lighting
device with a regular pattern comprising a plurality of modulations in the z-direction in each of
a first and second layer, thereby defining a plurality of openings between the first and second
layers in the z-direction, the regular patterns being identical but translated relative to one
another along the stack axis (SA) of one of the first and second layers (see Figure 2a and [0010]
The set of interconnecting seams is offset such that a first seam in a second set is offset in
relation to a first seam in a first set. The offset distance being in the range of 25% to 75% of the
distance between the interconnecting seams in the same set; “regular patterns being identical
but translated relative to one another along a stack axis (SA)” is interpreted as "offsetting layers
stacked in the z- direction"). The layered structure configuration of Van Os can reduce the glare
effect from light sources and consequently direct light into the structure itself ([0009] The
present invention is based on the realization that by arranging light sources in a layered structure with a specific geometry, the glare effect from the light sources can be reduced.
Consequently, the direction and angle of the light can be arranged such that the light is directed
into the structure itself).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the embodiments of Talgorn
such that the regular pattern comprising the plurality of modulations in the z-direction in each
of a first and second layer are identical but translated relative to one another along the stack
axis (SA) to define a plurality of openings between the first and second layers in the z-direction,
as taught by Van Os, for the benefit of reducing glare in lighting devices. Talgorn teaches that
voids can be formed to achieve local optical effects, prompting one of ordinary skill to look to
various void configurations in lighting devices that can achieve advantageous local optical
effects, such as reduced glare, as is taught by Van Os.
While Van Os teaches a shift S distance being in the range of 25% to 75% of the distance
between the interconnecting seams in the same set ([0010]), Talgorn modified with Van Os fails
to teach wherein the plurality of the layers have a layer width W and the plurality of
modulations have a pitch P, wherein the regular patterns are translated relative to one another
with a shift S, and wherein 2*W<P<20*W and S=x*P, wherein 0.4<x<0.6.
However, Talgorn does teach that the pitch is determined by the printer nozzle vibration
frequency and velocity ([0009] and [0053] The periodic pattern 110 has a period PP which is
equal to the translation, or printing, speed v divided by the frequency f of the vibrating motion
50: PP=v/f; the pitch P is interpreted as a period), and that the vibration motion of the printer
nozzle can vary the layer width ([0057] Typically the thickness or height of a printed layer is 0.02 mm to 2 mm. The vibrating motion can cause the height to vary between 0.01 mm and 4
mm; see “Response to Arguments”). Further, Talgorn teaches that tuning the periodic patterns by varying the phase or amplitude of the periodic patterns can tune the local optical properties of the 3D object ([0058] by including gaps or voids between adjacent lines, which can be provided by having subsequently printed layers with periodic patterns that are out of phase with respect to each other, optical properties of the 3D object can be tuned as well, especially when transparent or translucent materials are used in the printing process. Variations of the surface as well as the adherence, or mechanical connection, between adjacently printed materials may be induced, and/or voids can be formed that will induce scattering or even a sparkling effect. In this way (local) optical effects can be achieved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to optimize a pitch of Talgorn modified
with Van Os to be between 2 and 20 times the width, and to optimize a shift of Talgorn
modified with Van Os to be between 0.4 and 0.6 times the pitch through routine optimization
(see MPEP 2144.05. II). The printer nozzle frequency is a result effective variable that
determines the pitch and layer width, and one of ordinary skill would be motivated to vary the
printer nozzle frequency to tune the periodic patterns that results in varying the local optical
properties of the 3D object, including advantageously reducing the glare as is taught by Van Os.
Regarding claim 2, modified Talgorn modified with Van Os teaches the method
according to claim 1. Further, Talgorn teaches wherein each of the plurality of layers have the
layer width W ([0002] each layer thickness is defined and closely controlled by the height at
which the tip of the dispensing head is positioned above the preceding layer), and wherein the plurality of the modulations have an amplitude value A ([0053] The periodic pattern 110 has a
period PP which is equal to the translation, or printing, speed v divided by the frequency f of
the vibrating motion 50: PP=v/f).
While Talgorn fails to explicitly teach wherein 0.5*W<A<10*W, wherein the plurality of
the modulations have a modulation width W1 at half amplitude values A, wherein
0.5*W<W1<10*W, Talgorn does teach that the vibration motion of the printer nozzle can vary
the layer width ([0057] Typically the thickness or height of a printed layer is 0.02 mm to 2 mm.
The vibrating motion can cause the height to vary between 0.01 mm and 4 mm), and that the
amplitude is dependent on the vibration motion amplitude ([0053] periodic pattern 110 further
has a pattern amplitude PA which is, in this case, equal to the amplitude A of the vibrating
motion 50 because the direction of the vibrating motion (in the Y-direction or in the Z-direction)
is perpendicular to the direction of the translation). Further, Talgorn teaches that tuning the
periodic patterns by varying the phase or amplitude of the periodic patterns can tune the local
optical properties of the 3D object ([0058] by including gaps or voids between adjacent lines,
which can be provided by having subsequently printed layers with periodic patterns that are
out of phase with respect to each other, optical properties of the 3D object can be tuned as
well, especially when transparent or translucent materials are used in the printing process.
Variations of the surface as well as the adherence, or mechanical connection, between
adjacently printed materials may be induced, and/or voids can be formed that will induce
scattering or even a sparkling effect. In this way (local) optical effects can be achieved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to optimize the amplitude of modified Talgorn modified with Van Os to be between 0.5 and 10 times the layer width, and to optimize
the modulation width at half amplitude values to be between 0.5 and 10 times the width
through routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05. II). The printer nozzle vibration amplitude is a
result effective variable that determines the printed pattern and shape ([0009] the dimension
and the form, or shape, of the pattern that is created at the first part of the support structure
(i.e. the part that experiences the vibrating motion in addition to the translating movement) by
depositing material from the printer nozzle, is determined by at least a combination of the
translation speed, the vibration frequency and the vibration amplitude and the normal printing
parameters, such as the speed of dispensing and the material that is dispensed), and one of
ordinary skill would be motivated to vary the printer nozzle amplitude to tune the periodic
patterns that results in varying the local optical properties of the 3D object, including
advantageously reducing the glare as is taught by Van Os.
Regarding claim 3, modified Talgorn modified with Van Os teaches the method
according to claim 1. Further, Talgorn teaches the method comprising 3D printing at least one
of the first and second layers with the plurality of the modulations in one or more of a block-
shape way, in a zig-zag way, and in a meandering way ([0060]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Talgorn modified with Van Os teaches the method
according to claim 1. Further, Talgorn teaches wherein the 3D printable material is transmissive
for at least part of the visible light ([0058] by including gaps or voids between adjacent lines,
which can be provided by having subsequently printed layers with periodic patterns that are
out of phase with respect to each other, optical properties of the 3D object can be tuned as
well, especially when transparent or translucent materials are used in the printing process).
Regarding claim 5, modified Talgorn modified with Van Os teaches the method
according to claim 1. While Talgorn teaches wherein the 3D item comprises an item wall,
wherein the item wall comprises the first and second layer of 3D printed material (see adjacent
printed layers in Figure 4), Talgorn fails to teach wherein the method comprises providing the
plurality of layers with the plurality of the openings between both sides of the item wall.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to lighting devices, Van Os teaches providing
the plurality of layers with the plurality of the openings between both sides of the item wall
(see Figure 2a). The layered structure configuration of Van Os can reduce the glare effect from
light sources and consequently direct light into the structure itself ([0009] he present invention
is based on the realization that by arranging light sources in a layered structure with a specific
geometry, the glare effect from the light sources can be reduced. Consequently, the direction
and angle of the light can be arranged such that the light is directed into the structure itself).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the plurality of layers of modified
Talgorn modified with Van Os have the plurality of openings be between both sides of the item
wall, as taught by Van Os, for the benefit of reducing glare in lighting devices. Talgorn teaches
that voids can be formed to achieve local optical effects, prompting one of ordinary skill to look
to various void configurations in lighting devices that can achieve advantageous local optical
effects, such as reduced glare, as is taught by Van Os.
Regarding claim 6, modified Talgorn modified with Van Os teaches the method
according to claim 1. Further, Talgorn teaches wherein each of the plurality of layers have the
layer width W ([0002] each layer thickness is defined and closely controlled by the height at which the tip of the dispensing head is positioned above the preceding layer), wherein the
openings have a cross- sectional area having an equivalent circular diameter D (see annotated
Figure 2A on pg. 15 of the Office Action mailed 12/04/2024).
While Talgorn fails to explicitly teach wherein a shortest distance D2 between nearest
neighboring openings is selected from the range of W<d2<20*D, Talgorn does teach that the
pitch is determined by the printer nozzle vibration frequency and velocity ([0009] and [0053]
The periodic pattern 110 has a period PP which is equal to the translation, or printing, speed v
divided by the frequency f of the vibrating motion 50: PP=v/f; the pitch P is interpreted as a
period), and that the vibration motion of the printer nozzle can vary the layer width ([0057]
Typically the thickness or height of a printed layer is 0.02 mm to 2 mm. The vibrating motion
can cause the height to vary between 0.01 mm and 4 mm). Further, Talgorn teaches that tuning
the periodic patterns by varying the phase or amplitude of the periodic patterns can tune the
local optical properties of the 3D object ([0058] by including gaps or voids between adjacent
lines, which can be provided by having subsequently printed layers with periodic patterns that
are out of phase with respect to each other, optical properties of the 3D object can be tuned as
well, especially when transparent or translucent materials are used in the printing process.
Variations of the surface as well as the adherence, or mechanical connection, between
adjacently printed materials may be induced, and/or voids can be formed that will induce
scattering or even a sparkling effect. In this way (local) optical effects can be achieved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to optimize the shortest distance D2
between nearest neighboring openings of modified Talgorn modified with Van Os through routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05. II). The printer nozzle frequency and amplitude are
result effective variables that determine the pitch, layer width, and overall periodic shape, and
one of ordinary skill would be motivated to vary the printer nozzle frequency or amplitude to
tune the periodic patterns that results in varying the local optical properties of the 3D object,
including advantageously reducing the glare as is taught by Van Os.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Talgorn modified by Van Os fails to teach or suggest the claim limitation “wherein the regular patterns are translated relative to one another with a shift S, and wherein 2*W<P≤20*W and S=x*P, wherein 0.4≤x≤0.6" (see pg. 2-3 of Remarks), Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Talgorn teaches the pitch P (which is interpreted as the period) is determined by the printer nozzle vibration frequency and velocity, and that the vibration motion of the printer nozzle can vary the layer width W (see pg. 6-7 of the Office Action mailed 10/09/2025), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the pitch of Talgorn modified with Van Os to the claimed range through routine optimization.
In [0055] Talgorn teaches an example where a printing speed of 100 mm/sec and a width of the printed material of 0.3 mm results in a maximum frequency of the vibrating motion of 167 Hz to achieve a pattern period of 0.6 mm, which is at minimum 200% of the width of the printed material. Where P= 0.6 mm, then Talgorn satisfies the claimed range of 2*W<P ≤20*W, since a pattern period of 0.6 mm is 2*W (2*0.3 mm).
Van Os teaches a shift S distance ranging from 25% to 75% of the distance between the interconnecting seams in the set (see pg. 6 of the Office Action mailed 10/09/2025). Where S= 0.25 and P= 0.6 mm (as noted in the example used above), then x= (0.25/0.6)= 0.42 which satisfies the claimed range for x.
Talgorn teaches that the configuration (i.e. pitch, width), and therefore, the optical properties in the 3D object can be tuned by particular parameters (i.e. printer nozzle vibration frequency and velocity) and provides examples that, in light of the teachings of Van Os, would have made it obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to obtain the claimed range for the pitch P, shift S, and x through routine optimization.
Further, Talgorn teaches that tuning the periodic patterns by varying the phase or amplitude of the periodic patterns can tune the local properties of the 3D object (see pg. 7 of the Office Action mailed 10/09/2025). Applicant argues that Talgorn teaches adjusting the phase of periodic patterns to achieve a scattering or even sparkling effect, which indicates uneven lightning, and is different from the instant application which teaches a lighting device with reduced glare. However, claim 1 does not currently recite for the lighting device’s optical properties, and Talgorn also teaches that local optical effects can be achieved ([0058]), prompting one of ordinary skill to look to various lighting device geometries that tune the local optical effects, including the lighting device of Van Os which reduces glare.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Van Os is not analogous art to the claimed invention (see pg. 4 of Remarks), Examiner respectfully disagrees. When determining “the relevant field of endeavor” the invention’s subject matter in the patent application should be considered, “including the embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention” (see MPEP 2141.01(a)I.). While the claimed invention is directed to forming a lighting device by 3D printing, it is also directed to forming a lighting device with a particular configuration, including a stack of a plurality of layers with regular patterns that are translated with a shift S and a plurality of modulations with a pitch P. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be prompted to look to lighting devices with various configurations formed by 3D printing or other manufacturing methods.
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 ARIELLA MACHNESS whose telephone number is (408)918-7587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30-2:30 PT.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/ARIELLA MACHNESS/Examiner, Art Unit 1743