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 Interpretation
Applicant discloses in [0018] of the specification that “A computer readable storage medium, as that term is used in the present disclosure, is not to be construed as storage in the form of transitory signals per se, such as radio waves or other freely propagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves propagating through a waveguide, light pulses passing through a fiber optic cable, electrical signals communicated through a wire, and/or other transmission media. As will be understood by those of skill in the art, data is typically moved at some occasional points in time during normal operations of a storage device, such as during access, de-fragmentation or garbage collection, but this does not render the storage device as transitory because the data is not transitory while it is stored”. MPEP 2111.01 entitles Applicant can be own lexicographer, so based on Applicant’s own definition in [0018] of the specification, the recited “a computer program product comprising: one or more computer-readable storage media and program instructions stored on the one or more computer-readable storage media” in claims 8-14 have been construed as a computer program product comprising: one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media and program instructions stored on the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media”.
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 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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 13-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (US 20220118707 A1, hereinafter as “Erickson”) in view of Simske (US 20200089193 A1, hereinafter as “Simske”).
Regarding claim 1, Erickson teaches:
A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving a three-dimensional digital model file for construction of an object (“3D printed object 218” in FIG. 2 and [0054]) utilizing an additive manufacturing device (FIG. 2 and [0071]: “the controller (104) instructs the additive manufacturing device, i.e., the build material distributor (216) and the agent distributor (214), to form the 3D printed object (218) based on the 3D print information read from the storage element …”; And [0046]: “the print information that is read, either from the identifier or from a database, may be of a variety of types. For example, the print information may indicate print parameters to be used to form the 3D printed object. Examples of such print parameters include a print temperature, print orientation, print packing information, proximity to other parts, build layer thickness, and build layer composition”. These teach to receive a 3D digital model file for printing the 3D objected 218);
instructing, a secondary manufacturing device (“placement device 208” in FIG. 2 and [0072]), to dispose the cast (“storage element”/RFID in [0072]) at a position with respect to a partially constructed object by the additive manufacturing device (FIG. 2 and [0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104). During this pause, the placement device (208) collects the storage element, for example via a suction nozzle, moves over the 3D printed object (218) at which time the suction is removed and the storage element is placed inside the body of the 3D printed object (218)”); and
resuming the hybrid additive manufacturing of the partially constructed object with the cast until the construction of the object is complete ([0072]: “Printing is then resumed on top of the storage element such that it is entirely embedded in the 3D printed object”).
Erickson teaches all the limitations except responsive to receiving one or more additional requirements for the object, identifying, based on the three-dimensional digital model file and the one or more additional requirements for the object, a cast for the three-dimensional digital model file for integration into hybrid additive manufacturing of the object.
However, Simske teaches in an analogous art:
responsive to receiving one or more additional requirements for the object, identifying, based on the three-dimensional digital model file and the one or more additional requirements for the object, a customized component for the three-dimensional digital model file for integration into additive manufacturing of the object (FIG.s 2, 3 and 5, and [0022]: “Each of the example customized components 310, 320, 330 of FIG. 3 may be integrated with the example standardized component 200 of FIG. 2 or other standardized component. … In other examples, the example customized component 310, 320, 330 and a standardized component may be formed together by, for example, a 3D printing process”; and [0030]: “as illustrated in FIG. 5, the customized components 542, 552, 562 are formed into a corresponding standardized component 520 using a 3D printer 530. In this regard, instructions may be provided to the 3D printer indicating the custom option to be formed for each standardized component 520. Thus, the customized component 542, 552, 562,including corresponding descriptors 544, 554, 564 may be dynamically selected and printed within the mass production system 500”. All these teach to dynamically identify and select a customized component based on the 3D model of the object and the received “custom option”, i.e., additional requirements for the object, so the selected customized component can be integration into additive manufacturing of the object).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Erickson based on the teaching of Simske, to make the computer-implemented method to further comprise receiving a three-dimensional digital model file for construction of an object utilizing an additive manufacturing device; responsive to receiving one or more additional requirements for the object, identifying, based on the three-dimensional digital model file and the one or more additional requirements for the object, a cast for the three-dimensional digital model file for integration into hybrid additive manufacturing of the object. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification since it can help improve efficiencies in “time and cost”, as Simske suggests in [0011].
Regarding claim 2, Erickson-Simske teach(es) all the limitations of its base claim from which the claim depends on.
Erickson further teaches:
determining the position for placement of the cast with respect to the three-dimensional digital model file for the construction of the object ([0121]: “during the manufacturing process, a storage element is embedded (block 802) in the 3D printed object (FIG. 2, 218). That is, the placement device (FIG. 2, 208) may operate to collect a storage element, position it in a predetermined location which may be in the body of the 3D printed object (FIG. 2, 218), and physically place the storage element”);
instructing, the additive manufacturing device, to print the partially constructed object ([0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104)”); and
responsive to printing the partially constructed object, pausing the hybrid additive manufacturing of the three-dimensional model file (see [0072] above).
Regarding claim 3, Erickson-Simske teach(es) all the limitations of its base claim from which the claim depends on.
Erickson further teaches:
instructing, the additive manufacturing device, to cease printing layers of a material for a body of the partially constructed object ([0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104)”); and
instructing, the additive manufacturing device, to configure into a position to accept a disposing of the cast at the position with respect to the partially constructed object, wherein no component of the additive manufacturing device intrudes into an operational space of the secondary manufacturing device (FIG. 2 and [0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104). During this pause, the placement device (208) collects the storage element, for example via a suction nozzle, moves over the 3D printed object (218) at which time the suction is removed and the storage element is placed inside the body of the 3D printed object (218)”. Since the placement device 208 can not dispose the cast if its operational space is blocked by the additive printing device, Erickson teaches the additive print device is instructed to move out of the operational space of the placement device 208 to accept a disposing of the cast).
Regarding claim 4, Erickson-Simske teach(es) all the limitations of its base claim from which the claim depends on.
Erickson further teaches:
determining the position for placement of the cast with respect to the three-dimensional digital model file for the construction of the object ([0121]: “during the manufacturing process, a storage element is embedded (block 802) in the 3D printed object (FIG. 2, 218). That is, the placement device (FIG. 2, 208) may operate to collect a storage element, position it in a predetermined location which may be in the body of the 3D printed object (FIG. 2, 218), and physically place the storage element”); and
instructing, the additive manufacturing device, to configure into a position to accept a disposing of the cast at the position with respect to a printing platform, wherein no component of the additive manufacturing device intrudes into an operational space of the secondary manufacturing device (FIG. 2 and [0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104). During this pause, the placement device (208) collects the storage element, for example via a suction nozzle, moves over the 3D printed object (218) at which time the suction is removed and the storage element is placed inside the body of the 3D printed object (218)”. The cast is disposed inside the object 218 before further printing, so is disposed at a position with respect to a printing platform. Since the placement device 208 can not dispose the cast if its operational space is blocked by the additive printing device, Erickson teaches the additive print device is instructed to move out of the operational space of the placement device 208 to accept a disposing of the cast).
Regarding claim 6, Erickson-Simske teach(es) all the limitations of its base claim from which the claim depends on.
Erickson further teaches:
instructing, the secondary manufacturing device, to dispose the cast further comprises:
instructing, the secondary manufacturing device, to position over the cast at a first location (FIG. 2 and [0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104). During this pause, the placement device (208) collects the storage element, for example via a suction nozzle, moves over the 3D printed object (218) at which time the suction is removed and the storage element is placed inside the body of the 3D printed object (218)”. This teaches to position over the cast at a location to collect the cast);
instructing, the secondary manufacturing device, to collect the cast at the first location (FIG. 2 and [0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104). During this pause, the placement device (208) collects the storage element, for example via a suction nozzle, moves over the 3D printed object (218) at which time the suction is removed and the storage element is placed inside the body of the 3D printed object (218)”);
instructing, the secondary manufacturing device, to relocate the cast to a second position, wherein the second position is the position with respect to the partially constructed object by the additive manufacturing device (FIG. 2 and [0072]: “the additive manufacturing system (206) includes a placement device (208) to place the storage element in the 3D printed object (218). That is, the storage element may be formed within the 3D printed object (218) such that it accompanies the 3D printed object (218) along its path. The placement device (208) may place the storage element to facilitate this. In some examples, the placement device (208) embeds the storage element during printing of the 3D printed object (218). That is, printing may be paused, for example by the controller (104). During this pause, the placement device (208) collects the storage element, for example via a suction nozzle, moves over the 3D printed object (218) at which time the suction is removed and the storage element is placed inside the body of the 3D printed object (218)”).
Regarding claim 7, Erickson-Simske teach(es) all the limitations of its base claim from which the claim depends on.
Erickson further teaches:
a first material of the partially constructed object is different from a second material of the cast ([0164]: “First off, each 3D printed object (FIG. 2,218) with an embedded storage element may be read at the same time through the powder build material, since reading can be done through radio non-absorbing materials (most non-metals) like polymer and polymer powder”. This teaches the object 218 is made from radio non-absorbing materials like polymer, which is different from a material of the (storage element)/(RFID tag)).
Claim 8 recites a computer program product comprising computer-readable storage media storing program instructions to perform the method of claim 1 with patentably the same limitations. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected for the same reason recited in the rejection of claim 1.
Claims 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14 recite a computer program product comprising computer-readable storage media storing program instructions to perform the method of claims 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 respectively with patentably the same limitations. Therefore, claims 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14 are rejected for the same reason recited in the rejection of claims 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, respectively.
Claim 15 recites a computer system to perform the method of claim 1 with patentably the same limitations. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected for the same reason recited in the rejection of claim 1.
Claims 16, 17, 18 and 20 recite a computer system to perform the method of claims 2, 3, 4 and 6 respectively with patentably the same limitations. Therefore, claims 16, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected for the same reason recited in the rejection of claims 2, 3, 4 and 6, respectively.
Claims 5, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson in view of Simske, and in further view of Ge (US 20200210799 A1, hereinafter as “Ge”).
Regarding claim 5, Erickson-Simske teach(es) all the limitations of its base claim from which the claim depends on, but do not teach the one or more additional requirements are selected from the group consisting of: a user specified manufacturing time, a weight limit, a material type, a material utilization limit, a raw material cost limit, and a structural integrity limit.
However, Ge teaches in an analogous art:
the one or more additional requirements are selected from the group consisting of: a user specified manufacturing time, a weight limit, a material type, a material utilization limit, a raw material cost limit ([0009] An RFID tag may be used for tracking items, such as in a supply chain. Different types of RFID tags may be selected based on cost and functionality”. This teaches to select RFID type based on material cost), and a structural integrity limit.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Erickson-Simske based on the teaching of Ge, to make the computer-implemented method wherein the one or more additional requirements are selected from the group consisting of: a user specified manufacturing time, a weight limit, a material type, a material utilization limit, a raw material cost limit, and a structural integrity limit. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification since it can help “may make it more cost effective to manufacture”, as Ge suggests in [0011].
Claim 12 recites a computer program product comprising computer-readable storage media storing program instructions to perform the method of claim 5 with patentably the same limitations. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected for the same reason recited in the rejection of claim 5.
Claim 19 recites a computer system to perform the method of claim 5 with patentably the same limitations. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same reason recited in the rejection of claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Allen (US 20220134651 A1): teaches to print 3D object with embedded placement device using additive manufacturing system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES CAI whose telephone number is (571)272-7192. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Thomas Lee can be reached on 571-272-3667. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHARLES CAI/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2115