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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/29/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 15 does not further limit Claim 1 from which it ultimately depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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.
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) 2-4 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Journal of Computer Graphics Techniques Vol. 5, No. 3, 2016) in view of Zhao et al. (ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), Volume 35, Issue 4 (July 2016))
As to claim 2, Wang teaches a computer-implemented method comprising: determining, by a three-dimensional modelling system, one or more infill structures for a three-dimensional model of a solid object, wherein the one or more infill structures are located in an interior of a hollow shell of the three-dimensional model, the hollow shell and the one or more infill structures together defining a modified object for the three-dimensional model; determining, by the three-dimensional modelling system, that creation of the modified object, by the three-dimensional printer, using the one or more infill structures and the hollow shell satisfies one or more efficiency criteria by comparing data representing the one or more infill structures and the hollow shell of the modified object with data for the solid object (p 19, hollowing an object is more cost effective – comparing cost data, for example); and providing data for the one or more infill structures and the hollow shell that is useable to cause the three-dimensional printer to create the modified object after determination that the one or more efficiency criteria are satisfied. Also, for example, see p 21, using 20% of the solid volume on p 30 as well. The entire document of Wang is drawn to making the infill of the three-dimensional object more economical, efficient and stable.
Wang shows infill structures in its Figures, but not necessarily those claimed. Zhao shows rectilinear and concentric structures in Fig. 2 and discusses honeycomb structures in Figure 13 in order to optimize the 3D printing for efficiency, effectiveness, structural strength/stability or appearance (col 2 p 2). Non connected unit cells are also shown in Figure 11. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Wang to include various infill too paths as taught by Zhao in order to optimize the 3D printing for efficiency, effectiveness, structural strength/stability or appearance.
As to claims 3-6, the one or more efficiency criteria comprise a strength of the modified object being within a threshold value as in Wang Fig. 2 and pp 22-25. The material, pressure applied, quantity of material saved, time saved and support are documented throughout the document as well.
As to claim 7, the structure is chosen to minimize material while optimizing strength on Wang pp 22-25.
As to claims 8-12, infill is generated along an angle, such as those optimized for a triangle shape and skipped for other angles that are not optimized Wang p 26-29, column 2. The angle ranges and infill structures are changed depending on thickening or hollowing as needed on pp 30-33. Materials and different thicknesses for different portions are considered throughout this section an as shown in the Figures.
As to claims 13-14 and 16-17, printing is done layer by layer (introduction) modified by geometry analysis and corrections on Wang p 21-23.
Claim(s) 2-4 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Journal of Computer Graphics Techniques Vol. 5, No. 3, 2016) in view of Wu et al. (Computer-Aided Design 80 (2016) 32–42)
As to claim 2, Wang teaches a computer-implemented method comprising: determining, by a three-dimensional modelling system, one or more infill structures for a three-dimensional model of a solid object, wherein the one or more infill structures are located in an interior of a hollow shell of the three-dimensional model, the hollow shell and the one or more infill structures together defining a modified object for the three-dimensional model; determining, by the three-dimensional modelling system, that creation of the modified object, by the three-dimensional printer, using the one or more infill structures and the hollow shell satisfies one or more efficiency criteria by comparing data representing the one or more infill structures and the hollow shell of the modified object with data for the solid object (p 19, hollowing an object is more cost effective – comparing cost data, for example); and providing data for the one or more infill structures and the hollow shell that is useable to cause the three-dimensional printer to create the modified object after determination that the one or more efficiency criteria are satisfied. Also, for example, see p 21, using 20% of the solid volume on p 30 as well. The entire document of Wang is drawn to making the infill of the three-dimensional object more economical, efficient and stable.
Wang shows infill structures in its Figures, but not necessarily those claimed. Wu teaches rectilinear and honeycomb shaped toolpath infill structures on p 33 for optimizing stiffness and stability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Wang to include various infill too paths as taught by Wu in order to optimize the 3D printing for structural strength/stability.
As to claims 3-6, the one or more efficiency criteria comprise a strength of the modified object being within a threshold value as in Wang Fig. 2 and pp 22-25. The material, pressure applied, quantity of material saved, time saved and support are documented throughout the document as well.
As to claim 7, the structure is chosen to minimize material while optimizing strength on Wang pp 22-25.
As to claims 8-12, infill is generated along an angle, such as those optimized for a triangle shape and skipped for other angles that are not optimized Wang p 26-29, column 2. The angle ranges and infill structures are changed depending on thickening or hollowing as needed on pp 30-33. Materials and different thicknesses for different portions are considered throughout this section an as shown in the Figures.
As to claims 13-14 and 16-17, printing is done layer by layer (introduction) modified by geometry analysis and corrections on Wang p 21-23.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELLY M GAMBETTA whose telephone number is (571)272-2668. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
KELLY M. GAMBETTA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1715
/KELLY M GAMBETTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1715
Prosecution Insights