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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-9 and 12-17) in the reply filed on 04/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/29/2026.
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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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: “switching unit” and "correction unit” in claim 1.
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.
Claim limitations “switching unit configured to switch…” and “correction unit configured to correct…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language “configured to switch…” and “configured to correct…,” respectively, without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Terms “switching” and “correction” convey only function and not any known structure for performing the claimed functions.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 1-9 and 12-17 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
Figure 1 and paragraph 0032 disclose switching unit 32 and correction unit 39 being a structural component of controller 13.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Objections
Claims 12-17 are objected to because of the following informalities: “a width” and “a cross sectional area” in line 3 of claims 12 and 13, respectively, should be amended to use “the” instead of “a” as claims 2 and 4 already set forth “a width” and “a cross sectional area,” respectively. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-9 and 12-17 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, in relevant part, “a measuring unit configured to measure, in a non-contact manner, a shape of a weld bead that is deposited by a shape sensor attached to the torch…” which creates confusion as the claim recites that the weld bead is deposited by the shape sensor (i.e., “weld bead that is deposited by a shape sensor” has a different meaning than “weld bead, that is deposited, by a shape sensor”). If the intention is for the shape sensor to be the structure that deposits the weld bead, then it remains unclear in what way the shape sensor both measures the shape of the bead and deposits the bead. As best understood, it is the claimed torch that deposits (or at least, aids in depositing the weld bead).
Claim 1 recites, in relevant part, “a switching unit configured to switch the measurement information output by the measuring unit based on at least one of a shape and position information of a weld bead included in the deposition plan” which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear as to what the measurement information is switched. In other words, the claim requires switching the measurement information from the shape sensor to something else, but it is unclear what the information is being switched to. Claim 1 also recites that the measured information output by the measuring unit is “at least one of a representative height of the weld bead and a cross sectional area of the weld bead.” Here, the measured information output by the measuring unit includes at least one of a height and a cross sectional area of the bead. Assuming that the switching unit is configured to switch between height and cross sectional area values, then this further compounds the confusion as the scope of the claim includes situations in which only height or only cross sectional area information is used as the output. Additionally, it is not reasonable clear in what way the switched measurement information is intended to be used, which adds to the lack of clarity. It is unclear, for instance, if the intention is for the switching unit to switch the measurement information to some other variable and output that variable to the correction unit, which then uses such variable in correction a depositing condition.
Claims 2, 3, and 12 recite a width of a weld bead as it is compared to one in the deposition plan. However, it is unclear if the width of the weld bead is measured by the shape sensor or if the width is determined from some other means (e.g., mathematically determining the width using a controller).
Claim 6 recites “the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the representative height of the weld bead” which creates confusion as claim 1 states that the measuring unit measures the shape of the weld bead and outputs measurement information of at least one of a representative height or cross sectional area of the weld bead. In other words, claim 1 requires that the measurement information includes the height/cross sectional area of the bead. As such, it is unclear what is meant by switching the measurement information (which includes the heigh and cross sectional area) to the height of the weld bead.
Claims 7-9 each recite “the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the cross sectional area of the weld bead” which creates confusion as claim 1 states that the measuring unit measures the shape of the weld bead and outputs measurement information of at least one of a representative height or cross sectional area of the weld bead. In other words, claim 1 requires that the measurement information includes the height/cross sectional area of the bead. As such, it is unclear what is meant by switching the measurement information (which includes the heigh and cross sectional area) to the height of the weld bead.
Claims 14 and 15 each recite “the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the representative height of the weld bead” which creates confusion as claim 1 states that the measuring unit measures the shape of the weld bead and outputs measurement information of at least one of a representative height or cross sectional area of the weld bead. In other words, claim 1 requires that the measurement information includes the height/cross sectional area of the bead. As such, it is unclear what is meant by switching the measurement information (which includes the heigh and cross sectional area) to the height of the weld bead.
Claim 16 and 17 each recite “the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the cross sectional area of the weld bead” which creates confusion as claim 1 states that the measuring unit measures the shape of the weld bead and outputs measurement information of at least one of a representative height or cross sectional area of the weld bead. In other words, claim 1 requires that the measurement information includes the height/cross sectional area of the bead. As such, it is unclear what is meant by switching the measurement information (which includes the heigh and cross sectional area) to the height of the weld bead.
Remaining dependent claims, not explicitly detained, inherit the above deficiencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukase (US2020/0130264) in view of Baker (US2020/0368815) and in further view of Yorozu (US2020/0156322).
Regarding claim 1, Fukase teaches a manufacturing system (Fig. 1; 1) of an additively-manufactured object (Abstract; para. 002) in which weld beads (Fig. 2 and 4; bead 3a/3b) are deposited based on a deposition plan (program 61a-para. 0059), the manufacturing system comprising:
a torch (21) provided at a robot arm (movement device 23-para. 0044 discloses articulated robot);
a measuring unit (measuring unit 13) configured to measure, in a non-contact manner, a shape of a weld bead (para. 0053; measures the shapes of the object 3 and the layer 3b and includes a camera or a laser measuring device. Here, a camera is a non-contact type sensor for measuring the shape of the bead) that is deposited (via torch 21) by a shape sensor (camera-para. 0053) the shape with the shape stored in the program 61a. See also Fig. 6, Step 11 where the measured shape is output from the measuring unit to the comparing unit in order to compare the measured shape with the model shape) (Fig. 5 shows the shape of the bead having thickness T1-T4); and
a correction unit (condition changing unit 66) configured to correct a condition for depositing weld beads based on the measurement information and the deposition plan (para. 0094-0095; Fig. 6, steps S10-S13. The measurement unit measures the shape of the bead and outputs the information to the comparing unit which compares the measured shape to the stored shape. From there, if the shape difference is more than a threshold, the condition changing unit changes function 61b and the contents of the layer forming condition in order to correct shape errors.).
Fukase teaches the claimed invention except for the measuring unit/shape sensor being attached to the torch and a switching unit configured to switch the measurement information output by the measuring unit based on at least one of a shape and position information of a weld bead included in the deposition plan.
Baker relates to an additive manufacturing robot (Abstract) and teaches a sensor (Fig. 2; 46) being attached to a torch (14) mounted on the robot (65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at
the time the invention was filed to modify Fukase with Baker, by substituting the cooperative relationship between the sensor and torch of Fukase, to have the sensor attached to the torch as taught by Baker, for in doing so would provide an alternative torch/sensor arrangement established in the art. Here using the sensor integral to the torch would amount to a simple substitution of art recognized torch/sensor arrangement performing the same function of producing additively manufactured beads and measuring a shape of said beads, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (See MPEP 2144.06-II).
The combination of Fukase and Baker teaches substantially the claimed invention except for a switching unit configured to switch the measurement information output by the measuring unit based on at least one of a shape and position information of a weld bead included in the deposition plan.
Yorozu relates to a system (Fig. 10 and 23) for three dimensional fabrication in which the system measures the shape of the object during fabrication (Abstract).
Yorozu teaches (Fig. 23) a switching unit (processing circuitry-para. 0177 and claims 1 and 15) configured to switch the measurement information output by the measuring unit based on at least one of a shape and position information of a weld bead included in the deposition plan (para. 0157; “configured to be able to switch the measurement accuracy at a plurality of levels. The measurement accuracy at the plurality of levels can be implemented, for example, by providing a plurality of values for the scanning speed of the 3D scanner.”) (para. 0161; sets the measurement accuracy at any one of a plurality of switchable levels to the shape sensor 207 for each of the ranges divided by the range dividing unit 341. The range-measurement-accuracy setting unit 342 sets a higher measurement accuracy for a range including a more complex region and a lower measurement accuracy for a range including a more simple region. The range-measurement-accuracy setting unit 342 constitutes an accuracy setting unit in the present embodiment. The object shape measuring unit 340 switches the measurement accuracy set in the shape sensor 207 for each range and measures the measurement data.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at
the time the invention was filed to modify Fukase, as modified by Baker, with Yorozu by adding to the system of Fukase, the processing circuitry that switches the measurement information taught by Yorozu, for in doing so would allow for varying measurement accuracies to be implemented (para. 0153, 0157).
Regarding claim 2, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 1, and further teaches wherein, in a case where a width of a weld bead corresponding to a weld bead serving as a base is less than a predetermined first threshold in the shape of a weld bead included in the deposition plan, the switching unit causes the measuring unit to output the measurement information of the representative height of the weld bead [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is less than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a lower accuracy.].
Regarding claim 3, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 1, and further teaches wherein, in a case where a width of a weld bead serving as a base in the shape of a weld bead included in the deposition plan is equal to or greater than a predetermined first threshold, the switching unit causes the measuring unit to output the measurement information of the cross-sectional area of the weld bead [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy.].
Regarding claim 4, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 1, and further teaches wherein, in a case where a cross-sectional area of a weld bead serving as a base in the shape of a weld bead included in the deposition plan is less than a predetermined second threshold, the switching unit causes the measuring unit to output the measurement information of the representative height of the weld bead [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is less than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a lower accuracy.].
Regarding claim 5, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 1, and further teaches wherein in a case where a cross-sectional area of a weld bead serving as a base in the shape of a weld bead included in the deposition plan is equal to or greater than a predetermined second threshold, the switching unit causes the measuring unit to output the measurement information of the cross-sectional area of the weld bead [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy.].
Regarding claim 6, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 1, and further teaches wherein when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the representative height of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a travel speed or a feeding amount of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the representative height and a corresponding representative height in the deposition plan [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Regarding claim 7, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 1, and further teaches wherein, when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the cross-sectional area of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a travel speed or a feeding amount of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the cross-sectional area and a corresponding cross-sectional area in the deposition plan [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Regarding claim 8, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 3, and further teaches wherein, when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the cross-sectional area of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a feeding amount or a welding speed of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the cross-sectional area and a corresponding cross-sectional area in the deposition plan [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Regarding claim 9, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 5, and further teaches wherein, when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the cross-sectional area of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a travel speed or a feeding amount of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the cross-sectional area and a corresponding cross-sectional area in the deposition plan [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Regarding claim 12, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 2, and further teaches wherein, in a case where a width of a weld bead serving as a base in the shape of a weld bead included in the deposition plan is equal to or greater than a predetermined first threshold, the switching unit causes the measuring unit to output the measurement information of the cross-sectional area of the weld bead [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy.].
Regarding claim 13, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 4, and further teaches wherein, in a case where a cross-sectional area of a weld bead serving as a base in the shape of a weld bead included in the deposition plan is equal to or greater than a predetermined second threshold, the switching unit causes the measuring unit to output the measurement information of the cross-sectional area of the weld bead bead [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is less than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a lower accuracy.].
Regarding claim 14, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 2, and further teaches wherein, when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the representative height of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a travel speed or a feeding amount of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the representative height and a corresponding representative height in the deposition plan [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Regarding claim 15, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 4, and further teaches wherein, when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the representative height of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a travel speed or a feeding amount of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the representative height and a corresponding representative height in the deposition plan [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Regarding claim 16, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 12, and further teaches wherein, when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the cross-sectional area of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a travel speed or a feeding amount of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the cross-sectional area and a corresponding cross-sectional area in the deposition plan [Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Regarding claim 17, the primary combination teaches the system, as applied in claim 13, and further teaches wherein, when the switching unit switches the measurement information output from the measuring unit to the cross-sectional area of the weld bead, the correction unit adjusts at least one of a travel speed or a feeding amount of a filler metal for forming the weld bead or a heat input amount or a weaving condition of the weld bead so as to reduce a difference obtained by comparing the cross-sectional area and a corresponding cross-sectional area in the deposition plan[Fukase, as detailed above, teaches using the measurement unit to measure the shape of the bead and compare the measured shape to the model shape. Fukase also teaches that this comparison involves a threshold; i.e., if the measured shape is larger or smaller than the model shape, and that the output used in this comparison involves the heigh/CS area of the bead. Additionally, Fukase teaches, that based on the result of the comparison, the correction unit 66 changes a layer forming condition that includes movement speed of the torch, the amount of material ejected from the torch per unit time, the output of laser light, etc.-para. 0077 which causes the thickness of the bead to increase-para. 0082-0083. The combination suggests using the processing circuitry that switches the measurement accuracy of Yorozu in the system of Fukase. This combination would produce an control methodology in which the processing circuitry switches measurement when necessary. In this case, Yorozu teaches switching occurs between complex and simple regions of the component being measured. As such, when the shape of the component is larger than some threshold, the processing circuitry switches the measurement to a higher accuracy].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN C DODSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0529. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 12:00-8:00 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571)270-5095. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights