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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/12/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In view of the amendment filed 08/12/2025:
Claims 1-13, 17, 18, 23-28 are pending.
Claim 22 is withdrawn from further consideration.
Claims 14-16 and 19-21 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) 1-4, 6, 9-13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US5198159), and further in view of Hirano et al. (US5089185).
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura teaches a method for manufacturing a three- dimensional shaped object by solidifying a material (Abstract: A process of fabricating a three-dimensional object from a light curable liquid resin), the method comprising:
a first step that includes forming, in a first layer of the material, a first cured portion by curing the material at a first region, and defining, in the first layer, a first semi- cured portion by semi-curing the material at a second region adjacent to the first region (see annotated Figure 13A below);
a second step that includes forming, in a second layer of the material, a second cured portion by curing the material at a third region adjacent to the first cured portion, and defining, in the second layer, a second semi-cured portion and a third semi- cured portion separated from the second semi-cured portion after the first step, the second semi-cured portion being defined by the material at a fourth region adjacent to the third region, the third semi-cured portion being defined by the material at a fifth region adjacent to the third region and different from the fourth region being semi-cured (see annotated Figure 13A below; second cured portion is the three 100A cured components within the second layer);
a subsequent step that includes forming, in a third layer of the material, a fourth cured portion by curing the material at a sixth region adjacent to the second cured portion and defining, in the third layer, a fourth semi-cured portion by semi-curing the material at a seventh region adjacent to the fourth cured portion (see annotated Figure 13A below).
However, Nakamura teaches all the semi-cured portions are fully cured together after the formation of an object comprising all the cured and semi-cured portions (col 12 line 68- col 13 line 5), and fails to teach the semi-cured portions are cured during the formation of all the cured and semi-cured portions such that there is a third step after the second step including forming a third cured portion by curing the first and second semi-cured portions after the second step, the fourth semi-cured portion is formed during the subsequent step and after the third step, and a fifth step after the subsequent step that forms a fifth cured portion by curing the third and fourth semi-cured portions.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to a stereolithography method for additively manufacturing material, Hirano teaches the sequential formation of multiple layers with cured and adjacent uncured material. The cured portions are initially cured followed by curing of the adjacent uncured material before continuing to build additional layers (col 6 line 34-43). Further, Hirano teaches the number of layers formed with cured material before the adjacent uncured material is cured can be any number not less than two (col 4 line 44-46). A method where the uncured material is cured as the object is being formed makes use of a more targeted beam that allows for increased build surface accuracy (col 1 line 42-48 and col 5 line 39-45).
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 steps of curing the semi-cured portions of Nakamura occur during the formation of all the cured and semi-cured portions, as taught by Hirano, such that the method comprises a third step that forms a third cured portion by curing the first and second semi-cured portions after the second step, the subsequent step is a fourth step after the third step, and the method comprises a fifth step that forms a fifth cured portion by curing the third and fourth semi-cured portions after the fourth step. Fully curing the semi-cured material as the layers are additively manufactured versus after a build is complete uses a more targeted beam that has a known benefit of increasing build surface accuracy and avoiding overcuring of previously cured material.
PNG
media_image1.png
304
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 1. Further, Nakamura teaches wherein the first semi-cured portion is defined to be surrounded by the first cured portion (see annotated Figure 13A in the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 3, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 1. Further, Nakamura teaches wherein the fourth cured portion is adjacent to the second cured portion. The rejection of claim 1 above established that it would have been obvious to fully cure the second semi-cured portion and third semi-cured portion into a third cured portion. Therefore, the third cured portion is shown as the second semi-cured portion and third semi-cured portion in annotated Figure 13A in the rejection of claim 1 above, which is adjacent to the fourth cured portion.
Regarding claim 4, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 1. Nakamura teaches wherein:
the material is a photocuring resin in a liquid state (Abstract: radiating a light flux onto a photocurable fluid substance while moving the light flux in such a manner as to draw a section of a target object so as to cure the irradiated portion);
the first step includes forming the first cured portion by curing the material at the first region by using light having a first intensity (col 4 line 34-38; the light used to cure the photocurable resin has a particular power, and an intensity corresponding to that power);
the second step includes forming the second cured portion by curing the material at the third region by using light having a second intensity (col 4 line 38-40; the light used to cure the photocurable resin has a particular power, and an intensity corresponding to that power).
Further, the rejection of claim 1 above established that it would have been obvious for the method to comprise the third step which includes forming the third cured portion by curing the first and second semi-cured portions by using light having a third intensity. Hirano teaches the third cured portion is formed by curing the first and second uncured portions (col 4 line 39-43). The light used to cure the photocurable resin in the first and second uncured portions to form the third cured portion has a particular power, and an intensity corresponding to that power.
Regarding claim 6, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 4. Further, Nakamura teaches wherein the first step includes forming the first semi-cured portion by semi-curing the material at the second region by using light having a fourth intensity (see col 11 line 64-66 and Figure 13A; light used to cure the photocurable resin to the first and second semi-cured portions has a particular power, and an intensity corresponding to that power).
Regarding claim 9, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 4.
Further, Hirano teaches wherein a direction of the light irradiated in the third step is different from a direction of the light irradiated on the material in the first step (see direction of light flux 35 that is different from the direction of light flux 38 in Figure 1; col 3 line 46-51).
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 a direction of the light irradiated in the third step of Nakamura modified with Hirano be different from a direction of the light irradiated on the material in the first step, as taught by Hirano, to increase build surface accuracy and avoid overcuring of previously cured material.
Regarding claim 10, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 1. Nakamura teaches the method further comprising a step of drawing out an object from a vessel that stores the material (col 12 line 68- col 13 line 1), and the rejection of claim 1 above established that it would have been obvious for the object of Nakamura modified with Hirano to include the first, second, third, and fourth cured portions.
Regarding claim 11, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 1. Further, Nakamura teaches wherein the first step includes defining, in the first layer, a first uncured portion at a region adjacent to the first cured portion, the first cured portion being located between the first semi-cured portion and the first uncured portion, and wherein the second step includes defining, in the second layer, a second uncured portion at a region adjacent to the second cured portion, the second cured portion being located between the second semi-cured portion and the second uncured portion (see annotated Figure 13A below).
PNG
media_image2.png
523
1170
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 11. Nakamura teaches the method further comprising a step of drawing out an object from a vessel that stores the material without solidifying the first and second uncured portions (col 12 line 68- col 13 line 1), and the rejection of claim 1 above established that it would have been obvious for the object of Nakamura modified with Hirano to include the first, second, and third cured portions.
Regarding claim 13, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 11, further comprising:
a sixth step that includes forming, in a fourth layer of the material, a sixth cured portion by curing the material at an eighth region and defining, in the fourth layer, a fifth semi-cured portion by semi-curing the material at a ninth region adjacent to the sixth cured portion (see annotated Figure 13A below).
While Nakamura fails to teach the fifth semi-cured portion is semi-cured after the fourth step and before the fifth step and wherein in the fifth step, the fifth cured portion is formed by curing the third to fifth semi-cured portions, Hirano teaches the sequential formation of multiple layers with cured and adjacent uncured material. The cured portions are initially cured followed by curing of the adjacent uncured material before continuing to build additional layers (col 6 line 34-43). Further, Hirano teaches the number of layers formed with cured material before the adjacent uncured material is cured can be any number not less than two (col 4 line 44-46).
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 steps of curing the semi-cured portions of Nakamura occur during the formation of all the cured and semi-cured portions, as taught by Hirano, such that the method comprises the fifth semi-cured portion being semi-cured after the fourth step and before the fifth step and the fifth cured portion being formed by curing the third to fifth semi-cured portions in the fifth step. Fully curing the semi-cured material as the layers are additively manufactured versus after a build is complete uses a more targeted beam that has a known benefit of increasing build surface accuracy and avoiding overcuring of previously cured material.
PNG
media_image3.png
527
1170
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 6. Further, Nakamura teaches wherein the second step includes forming the second semi-cured portion by semi-curing the material using light having a fifth intensity (see col 11 line 64-66 and Figure 13A; light used to cure the photocurable resin to the first and second semi-cured portions has a particular power, and an intensity corresponding to that power).
Claim(s) 5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Nakamura et al. (US5198159) and Hirano et al. (US5089185), and further in view of Bartow et al. (US20200164572).
Regarding claim 5, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 4. While Nakamura and Hirano fail to explicitly teach wherein the third intensity is stronger than the first intensity, Nakamura does teach varying the intensities to vary the extent of curing (col 12 line 32-36), prompting one of ordinary skill to look to intensity values to form the first and second cured regions and the third cured region.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to curing a photocurable material with light, Bartow teaches wherein the third intensity is stronger than the first intensity ([0054] the
second portion 1217b of three-dimensional article 1217 has a greater thickness than a first
portion 1217a of the same three-dimensional article 1217. This may be achieved by irradiating
the second portion 1217b with a greater dosage than the first portion 1217a is irradiated; see
Figure 8). Varying the intensity will vary the cure depth, where a higher intensity increases the
cure depth ([0053] the intensity and duration of the irradiation from the LED or lamp 1166 will
impact the depth of cure (e.g., polymerization) of the composition 1116 in a direction normal to
the major surface 1111 of the substrate 1110).
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 third intensity of Nakamura modified with Hirano be stronger than the first intensity, as taught by Bartow, as one of ordinary skill would be motivated to increase the cure depth for curing the third portion. The third cured portion
corresponds to a two-layer thick portion consisting of the first and second portion, while the
first and second cured portions correspond to a single layer thickness. Therefore, one of
ordinary skill in the art would look to increasing the intensity to form the third cured portion
that is thicker than the first and second cured portion.
Regarding claim 18, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 17. However, Hirano fails to teach wherein the third intensity is stronger than the fifth intensity.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to curing a photocurable material with light,
Bartow teaches wherein the third intensity is stronger than the fifth intensity ([0054] the
second portion 1217b of three-dimensional article 1217 has a greater thickness than a first
portion 1217a of the same three-dimensional article 1217. This may be achieved by irradiating the second portion 1217b with a greater dosage than the first portion 1217a is irradiated; see
Figure 8). Varying the intensity will vary the cure depth, where a higher intensity increases the
cure depth ([0053] the intensity and duration of the irradiation from the LED or lamp 1166 will
impact the depth of cure (e.g., polymerization) of the composition 1116 in a direction normal to
the major surface 1111 of the substrate 1110).
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 third intensity of Nakamura modified with Hirano be stronger than the fifth intensity, as taught by Bartow, as one of ordinary skill would be motivated to increase the cure depth for curing the third portion. The third cured portion
corresponds to a two-layer thick portion consisting of the first and second portion, while the
first and second cured portions correspond to a single layer thickness. Therefore, one of
ordinary skill in the art would look to increasing the intensity to form the third cured portion
that is thicker than the first and second cured portion.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US5198159) and Hirano et al. (US5089185), and further in view of Hokuf et al. (US5429908).
Regarding claim 7, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches method according to claim 6. However, Nakamura fails to teach wherein the defining of the first semi-cured portion in the first step includes irradiating light on the second region in such a manner that an exposure intensity of light for forming the first semi-cured portion is increased stepwise or successively toward the first region.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to additive manufacturing, Hokuf teaches
wherein the defining of the first semi-cured portion in the first step includes irradiating light on
the second region in such a manner that an exposure intensity of light for forming the first
semi-cured portion is increased successively toward the first region (col 7 line 43-50; where
there is a fall off on the exposure level due to the gaussian shape of the beam in the first
region, then as the intensity of light goes from the first semi-curing portion to the first region it
is increased successively as is shown in Figure 3).
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 first step of Nakamura modified with Hirano
irradiate light on the second region in such a manner that an exposure intensity of light for forming the first semi-cured portion is increased successively toward the first region, as taught
by Hokuf. The gaussian shape of the exposing beam allows for the formation of semi-cured
portions, which have a known benefit significantly reducing distortions due to internal stresses,
particularly in overhang regions.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US5198159) and Hirano et al. (US5089185), and further in view of Fitzinger et al.
(US20180001562).
Regarding claim 8, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 6. However, Hirano fails to teach wherein the defining of the first semi-cured portion in the first step includes irradiating light on the second region in such a manner that an exposure intensity of light for forming the first semi-cured portion is increased stepwise or successively in a direction where a plurality of layers including the first and second layers are laminated.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to curing a photocurable material with light,
Fitzinger teaches increasing an exposure intensity of light stepwise or successively in a direction
where a plurality of layers including the first and second layers are laminated (see curve of
illumination intensity increasing in the Z-direction in Figure 4 and [0037]). Stepwise and
successive changes in intensity result in overlap illumination in adjacent areas
such that undesired geometric inaccuracies, seams, or fractures are avoided ([0004]- [0005]).
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 defining of the first semi-cured portion in the
first step of Nakamura modified with Hirano include irradiating light on the second region in such a manner that an exposure intensity of light for forming the first semi-cured portion is increased stepwise or successively in a direction where a plurality of layers including the first and second layers are laminated, as taught by Fitzinger, for the benefit of avoiding undesired geometric inaccuracies, seams, or fractures in adjacent areas.
Claim(s) 23-26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Nakamura et al. (US5198159) and Hirano et al. (US5089185), and further in view of Stampfl
(US20150258732).
Regarding claim 23, Nakamura modified with Hirano teaches the method according to claim 1. Nakamura teaches wherein the solidifying is performed by using an exposure unit and irradiating the material with light from the exposure unit (col 6 line 66- col 7 line). While Nakamura teaches the exposure unit moves in X- and Y-directions to draw a desired two-dimensional pattern (col 7 line 1-4), Nakamura fails to teach the exposure unit includes a plurality of cells arranged in a matrix in X- and Y-directions, the first cured portion is formed by irradiating the material at the first region with light from a first cell of the plurality of cells, and the first semi-cured portion is formed by irradiating the material at the second region with light from a second cell of the plurality of cells.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to a stereolithography additive manufacturing
apparatus, Stampfl teaches an exposure unit ([0034] an exposure unit having a light source 2
(wavelength 460 nm), a two-dimensional light intensity modulator 4 in the form of a DLP
(Digital Light Processing) chip, which is illuminated by the light source, and a programmable
control unit (not shown) were used) that includes a plurality of cells arranged in a matrix in X-
and Y-directions (two-dimensional light intensity modulator 4; Figure 2), and by irradiating the
material with light from the exposure unit, wherein a first cured portion is formed by irradiating
the material at a first region with light from a first cell of the plurality of cells, and wherein a
first semi-cured portion is formed by irradiating the material at a second region with light from
a second cell of the plurality of cells ([0035] FIG. 2 in turn schematically shows the detail of
6.times.6 exposure elements of the light intensity modulator. Here, the exposure elements
activated in the current exposure step are represented by shading. Two types of shading are
shown, the differently shaded exposure elements carrying out exposures with different
intensity profiles as indicated on the right in FIG. 2; a lower intensity will lead to partial curing in
comparison to higher intensities that will lead to a full cure).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano with the exposure unit of Stampfl to achieve the predictable result of irradiating a
desired pattern of the material. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success for the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano to be substituted with the exposure unit of Stampfl, since Nakamura, Hirano, and Stampfl are all directed to stereolithography additive
manufacturing apparatuses that cure material with varying degrees in a multi-step curing
process. Further, Stampfl teaches its exposure unit has a known benefit of operating the light
source at each point in time with a minimally required intensity such that a dark field is reduced
([0013] In this manner it is possible to operate the light source at each point in time only with
the minimally required intensity; as a result the so called dark field is reduced. The dark field is
composed of areas with image elements which during an exposure step are not to be exposed
at all).
Regarding claim 24, Nakamura modified with Hirano and Stampfl teaches the method
according to claim 23. While Nakamura fails to teach wherein the third portion is formed by
irradiating the material at the second region with light from the second cell, Stampfl teaches
multiple layers forming a three-dimensional body where each layer has a predetermined shape
defined by an exposure region with a predetermined contour (Abstract: latter two steps are
repeated until a shaped body having a predetermined shape has been formed by the sequence
of cured layers with contours predetermined layer by layer, each exposure in an exposure
region having a predetermined contour being carried out by controlled activation of individual
exposure elements in a two-dimensional array of exposure elements, each exposure element
being assigned an image element, wherein the exposure of the exposure region is carried out
by a common light source and by a two-dimensional light intensity modulator which is
illuminated by the light source and which has a grid of individually controllable intensity modulators, in such a way that each illuminated intensity modulator forms and exposure
element that exposes an image element in the exposure region, wherein a two-dimensional
matrix is compiled for each exposure step of a layer).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano with the exposure unit of Stampfl to achieve the predictable result of irradiating a
desired pattern of the material. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success for
the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano to be substituted with the exposure unit of Stampfl, since Nakamura, Hirano, and Stampfl are all directed to stereolithography additive
manufacturing apparatuses that cure material with varying degrees in a multi-step curing
process. Further, Stampfl teaches its exposure unit has a known benefit of operating the light
source at each point in time with a minimally required intensity such that a dark field is reduced
([0013] In this manner it is possible to operate the light source at each point in time only with
the minimally required intensity; as a result the so called dark field is reduced. The dark field is
composed of areas with image elements which during an exposure step are not to be exposed
at all).
Regarding claim 25, Nakamura modified with Hirano and Stampfl teaches the method
according to claim 23. While Nakamura fails to teach wherein the third portion is formed by
irradiating the material at the second region with light from a third cell of the plurality of cells,
Stampfl teaches multiple layers forming a three-dimensional body where each layer has a
predetermined shape defined by an exposure region with a predetermined contour (Abstract:
latter two steps are repeated until a shaped body having a predetermined shape has been formed by the sequence of cured layers with contours predetermined layer by layer, each
exposure in an exposure region having a predetermined contour being carried out by controlled
activation of individual exposure elements in a two-dimensional array of exposure elements,
each exposure element being assigned an image element, wherein the exposure of the
exposure region is carried out by a common light source and by a two-dimensional light
intensity modulator which is illuminated by the light source and which has a grid of individually
controllable intensity modulators, in such a way that each illuminated intensity modulator
forms and exposure element that exposes an image element in the exposure region, wherein a
two-dimensional matrix is compiled for each exposure step of a layer).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano with the exposure unit of Stampfl to achieve the predictable result of irradiating a
desired pattern of the material. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success for
the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano to be substituted with the exposure unit of Stampfl, since Nakamura, Hirano, and Stampfl are all directed to stereolithography additive
manufacturing apparatuses that cure material with varying degrees in a multi-step curing
process. Further, Stampfl teaches its exposure unit has a known benefit of operating the light
source at each point in time with a minimally required intensity such that a dark field is reduced
([0013] In this manner it is possible to operate the light source at each point in time only with
the minimally required intensity; as a result the so called dark field is reduced. The dark field is
composed of areas with image elements which during an exposure step are not to be exposed
at all).
Regarding claim 26, Nakamura modified with Hirano and Stampfl teaches the method
according to claim 23. While Nakamura fails to teach wherein the light from the first cell and the light from the second cell are emitted by a common light source, Stampfl teaches the light from the first cell and the light from the second cell are emitted by a common light source ([0034] an exposure unit having a light source 2 (wavelength 460 nm), a two-dimensional light intensity modulator 4 in the form of a DLP (Digital Light Processing) chip, which is illuminated by the light source, and a programmable control unit (not shown) were used).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano with the exposure unit of Stampfl to achieve the predictable result of irradiating a
desired pattern of the material. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success for
the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano to be substituted with the exposure unit of Stampfl, since Nakamura, Hirano, and Stampfl are all directed to stereolithography additive
manufacturing apparatuses that cure material with varying degrees in a multi-step curing
process. Further, Stampfl teaches its exposure unit has a known benefit of operating the light
source at each point in time with a minimally required intensity such that a dark field is reduced
([0013] In this manner it is possible to operate the light source at each point in time only with
the minimally required intensity; as a result the so called dark field is reduced. The dark field is
composed of areas with image elements which during an exposure step are not to be exposed
at all).
Regarding claim 28, Nakamura modified with Hirano and Stampfl teaches the method according to claim 23. While Nakamura fails to teach wherein the plurality of cells are arranged in a liquid crystal panel or a digital micromirror device element, Stampfl teaches the plurality of cells are arranged in a liquid crystal panel or a digital micromirror device element ([0003]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano with the exposure unit of Stampfl to achieve the predictable result of irradiating a
desired pattern of the material. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success for
the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with Hirano to be substituted with the exposure unit of Stampfl, since Nakamura, Hirano, and Stampfl are all directed to stereolithography additive
manufacturing apparatuses that cure material with varying degrees in a multi-step curing
process. Further, Stampfl teaches its exposure unit has a known benefit of operating the light
source at each point in time with a minimally required intensity such that a dark field is reduced
([0013] In this manner it is possible to operate the light source at each point in time only with
the minimally required intensity; as a result the so called dark field is reduced. The dark field is
composed of areas with image elements which during an exposure step are not to be exposed
at all).
Claim(s) 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US5198159), Hirano et al. (US5089185), and Stampfl (US 20150258732), and further in view of
Yuan et al. (US20170326786).
Regarding claim 27, Nakamura modified with Hirano and Stampfl teaches the method
according to claim 26. While Nakamura teaches varying the intensities to vary the extent of curing (col 12 line 32-36), Nakamura fails to teach wherein the third portion is formed by
irradiating the material at the second region with light emitted by a light source other than the
common light source.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to a stereolithography additive manufacturing
apparatus, Yuan teaches one irradiation source (digital light processing unit; 203; Figure 2) used
to irradiate main body area 301 (see Figure 3) and a second irradiation source (laser 2051;
Figure 2) used to irradiate boundary filling areas 305, 306, 307, and 308 (Figure 3 and [0033]
emitting a first light beam 208 used for the main body area 301 in a corresponding image 30 of
the layer… a second light beam 209 used for the boundary filling areas 305, 306, 307, and 308
in the corresponding image 30). Having a larger main body area irradiated by one light source
and a smaller boundary area irradiated by a different light source avoids edge distortion and
improves precision of the three-dimensional object formation ([0050]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the exposure unit of Nakamura modified with
Hirano and Stampfl to include two light sources, as taught by Yuan, to allow for the third portion to be formed by irradiating the material at the second region with light emitted by a light source other than the common light source. Multiple light sources irradiating different portions of the layers have a known benefit of avoiding edge distortions and improving the three-dimensional object formation precision.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (see Remarks filed 08/12/2025) with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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