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
Claims 13-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 04/22/2026.
Priority
The present application is a Continuation-in-part of application 16/837,696. Claims 1-8 do not find support in 16/837,696 and thus have priority date 03/16/2023. Claims 9-12 find support in 16/837,696 but do not find support in provisional application 62/827,527 and thus have priority date 04/01/2020.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Many of the claim limitations find no support in the originally filed written specification and drawings. Substantially none of the limitations following “identifying at least one non-compliant region” in claim 1 are present. Including the second sequential list the second template pattern the second predictive thermal model and conditionally using the second sequential list. While originally filed claims are presumed to have support this assumption if an essential or critical feature is not described or if the claims are directed to a function or use without providing the underlying disclosure to achieve the function. In this case the following questions arise: where is the support for the second template pattern and how is this derived? What is the ‘second predictive model’ and how is it derived?.
The specification seems only to be directed to a first temperature sensing (or modeling) in which a hold is performed when temperature deviations are detected/modeled (see e.g. Figs. 22-29). None of the flow charts or method descriptions include the claimed invention. Further, the claimed invention is not immediately envisagable from the claimed disclosure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2022/0347917 to Lecompere.
In an additive manufacturing system for forming an object, according to a three- dimensional digital data model describing the object's surface and by cumulative discrete depositions of a feedstock (“curable material”) material into specific voxel locations (Fig. 10, e.g.), a method comprising: obtaining a two-dimensional model slice (Fig. 10, e.g.) derived by computing an intersection between the three-dimensional digital data model and a plane (¶ [0038-0044]), the model slice depicting one or more contours of the object within the plane(¶ [0038-0044]; see Fig. 10, contour line shown); selecting a tessellated two-dimensional template pattern representing the boundaries of voxels within which the material may be deposited to collectively form a layer of the material parallel to the plane (see Fig. 10, square tesselations); superimposing the template pattern upon the model slice (Fig. 10 see legend on each tessellation); identifying a first set of required perimeter voxels represented within the template pattern required to be filled by the material to ensure that the material is present at every point along the object contours depicted in the model slice (A2-A1.2); assembling a first sequential list of voxel-filling instructions; for at least one original voxel in the first set of required perimeter voxels((¶ [0038-0044]), altering at least one corresponding voxel-filling instruction in the first sequential list to reduce an amount by which the material deposited into the original voxel space will extend beyond the object contours (instruction A1.1 and A3); and outputting the sequential list of instructions to control the additive manufacturing system to form the object (Fig. 10). Wherein the altering the voxel-filling instruction comprises changing the deposit amount while ensuring the material is present at every point along the object contours (see all object contour filled in Fig. 10, noting that A3 represents a less intense curing and thus a smaller “deposit amount” of the final cured product).
Prior art note: Lecompere is considered prior art as the claims 9-12 are not believed to find support in the provisional application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WOODY A LEE JR whose telephone number is (571)272-1051. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 0800-1630.
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, Edward "Ned" Landrum can be reached at 571-272-5567. 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.
/WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights