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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-14, in the reply filed on 12/15/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 12/15/2025.
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 1-7 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.
Regarding claim 1: the recitation “the detected temperatures” in line 9 is indefinite as it is not clear how “a temperature sensor detecting a temperature” introduced in lines 4-5 of the claim is written as a singular sensor to detect a singular temperature, but then there are detected temperatures in the plural in line 9.
For the purposes of prior art rejections, the recitation “the detected temperatures” is being interpreted consistent with lines 4-5 and as a singular detected temperature. Claims 2-7 are rejected due to their dependency, either directly or indirectly, on claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Defensive Publication (“Apparatus and Methods for Real-Time Stress and Control in Additive Manufacturing”; made of record in the IDS filed 07/06/2023; herein referred to as Defensive Publication) in view of Schneider et al. (EP 3970950; made of record in the IDS filed 10/17/2025, citations taken from the translated version provided herewith; herein referred to as Schneider).
As to claim 1: Defensive Publication discloses the claimed additive manufacturing system for forming a component (i.e., additive manufacturing apparatus 100 configured to construct an object 115) (Defensive Publication at page 4, lines 8-10; FIG. 1), the additive manufacturing system comprising:
a compression rig comprising a compression head supporting a top compression device applying a compressive load onto a top surface of the component (i.e., compression load device 113 includes an actuator 117 and a load source 118, where the load source 118 includes a roller for applying a compressive load to the deposition material deposited on the build plate 112 or object 115) (Defensive Publication at page 6, line 17 – page 7, line 6; FIG. 1),
a temperature sensor detecting a temperature of the top surface of the component (i.e., temperature sensor 120 configured to check a surface temperature of the layer of deposition material deposited) (Defensive Publication at page 7, line 22 – page 8, line 6; FIG. 1), and
a controller configured to adjust a position of the compression rig and a load applied by the top compression device based on at least one of the detected temperatures and distances (i.e., the controller 124 is configured to control the compression load device 113 based on the measurements of the temperature sensor 120; if a measurement of the temperature sensor 120 indicates that a deposition material at a location on the build plate 112 or object 115 is not suitable, the controller 124 transmits control signals to the actuator 117 of the compression load device 113 to adjust a positioning of the load source 118 relative to the build plate 112 or the object 115) (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 12-22; FIG. 1).
Defensive Publication discloses the additive manufacturing apparatus 100 including a stress sensor 122, where the stress sensor 122 and the temperature sensor 120 are disposed on the actuator 117 on respective sides of load source 118 (Defensive Publication at page 7, lines 22-23; FIG. 1); though, Defensive Publication fails to disclose the claimed pair of distance sensors positioned on opposite sides of the top compression device and detecting a distance to the top surface of the component.
However, Schneider teaches an arrangement 2 for additive manufacturing having a printing arrangement 4, wherein the printing arrangement 4 has a sensor arrangement 8 arranged leading in the printing direction and a sensor arrangement 8 arranged trailing the printing direction (i.e., pair of sensors positioned on opposite sides of a device) (Schneider at [0031], FIG. 3). Schneider further teaches two redundant distance sensors being used in the sensor arrangement for ascertaining a distance d from the arrangement 2 to the applied printing material 22 (i.e., pair of distance sensors detecting a distance to the top surface of the component) (Schneider at [0020], [0027], FIG. 3).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the pair of distance sensors positioned on opposite sides of a device detecting a distance as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Schneider above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way, with the additional benefit of the pair of distance sensors positioned on opposite sides of the device achieves higher accuracy and reliability (as recognized by Schneider at [0020]).
As to claim 2: Defensive Publication and Schneider disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 1. Defensive Publication discloses the additive manufacturing apparatus 100 including a stress sensor 122, where the stress sensor 122 and the temperature sensor 120 are disposed on the actuator 117 on respective sides of load source 118 (Defensive Publication at page 7, lines 22-23; FIG. 1) and therefore reads on the claimed wherein the temperature sensor comprises: a first temperature sensor positioned in front of the top compression device and detecting a first temperature of a first portion of the top surface of the component.
Though, Defensive Publication fails to disclose the claimed wherein the temperature sensor comprises: a second temperature sensor positioned behind the top compression device and detecting a second temperature of a second portion of the top surface of the component.
However, Schneider remains as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Schneider further teaches a sensor arrangement 8 arranged leading in the printing direction and a sensor arrangement 8 arranged trailing the printing direction; and two redundant sensors being used in the sensor arrangement, where the sensors can be temperature sensors (i.e., pair of temperature sensors detecting a temperature) (Schneider at [0020], [0031], FIG. 3). Accordingly, Schneider reads on the claimed wherein the temperature sensor comprises a second temperature sensor positioned behind the device and detecting a second temperature of a second portion of the top surface of the component, for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
As to claim 5: Defensive Publication and Schneider disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 1. Schneider further reads on the claimed wherein the pair of distance sensors comprises: a first distance sensor positioned in front of the top compression device and detecting a first distance to a first portion of the top surface of the component (Schneider at [0020], [0031], FIG. 3); and a second distance sensor positioned behind the top compression device and detecting a second distance to a second portion of the top surface of the component (Schneider at [0020], [0031], FIG. 3), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
As to claim 6: Defensive Publication and Schneider disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 5. Defensive Publication, modified by Schneider, further discloses the claimed wherein the controller is configured to compute a strain in the component based on the first distance and the second distance (i.e., stress sensor 122 measures a residual stress in the layer of deposition after the counterbalancing treatments are performed via the compression load device 103; and with a measured residual stress, the strain present in the layer of deposition after the compression load device 103 has performed counterbalancing treatments can be acquired given strain is the measure of deformation resulting from stress and therefore is directly related to the determined stress) (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3).
As to claim 7: Defensive Publication and Schneider disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 6. Defensive Publication, modified by Schneider, further discloses the claimed additive manufacturing system further comprising: a linear actuator for positioning the top compression device relative to the top surface (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3), wherein the controller is configured to: send a signal to the linear actuator to move the top compression device closer to the top surface in response to determining that the strain is below a predetermined strain range (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3); and send a signal to the linear actuator to move the top compression device farther from the top surface in response to determining that the strain exceeds the predetermined strain range (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Defensive Publication and Schneider as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Garcia Grau et al. (US 2022/0134669; herein referred to as Garcia Grau).
As to claim 3: Defensive Publication and Schneider disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 2. Defensive Publication discloses the controller 124 being configured to determine if a temperature of the deposition material is suitable for a treatment via the compression load device (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 4-8); though, modified Defensive Publication fails to explicitly disclose the claimed wherein the controller is configured to compute an average temperature based on the first temperature and the second temperature.
However, Garcia Grau teaches an additive manufacturing apparatus using a first thermal sensor 108 and a second thermal sensor 110 to measure the target temperatures of print bed 104 (Garcia Grau at [0022]), and the measurements acquired using the first sensor 108 and the second sensor 110 are transmitted to a processor 112 for processing an average temperature (Garcia Grau at [0027]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the processor configured to compute an average temperature based on the first temperature and second temperature as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Garcia Grau above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 4: Defensive Publication, Schneider and Garcia Grau disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 3. Defensive Publication, modified thus far, further discloses the claimed additive manufacturing system further comprising: a deposition assembly having a deposition head through which melted feedstock material is deposited (Defensive Publication at page 4, lines 18-20; page 5, lines 3-5; FIG. 3); an actuator positioning the compression head relative to the deposition head (Defensive Publication at page 6, line 17 – page 7, line 1; FIG. 3), wherein the controller is configured to: send a signal to the actuator to move the compression head closer to the deposition head in response to determining that the average temperature is below a predetermined temperature range (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 4-8; page 8, lines 12-17; FIG. 3); and send a signal to the actuator to move the compression head farther from the deposition head in response to determining that the average temperature exceeds the predetermined temperature range (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 4-8; page 8, lines 12-17; FIG. 3).
Claims 8-9 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Defensive Publication (“Apparatus and Methods for Real-Time Stress and Control in Additive Manufacturing”; made of record in the IDS filed 07/06/2023; herein referred to as Defensive Publication) in view of Schneider et al. (EP 3970950; made of record in the IDS filed 10/17/2025, citations taken from the translated version provided herewith; herein referred to as Schneider) and further in view of Corsmeier (US 2019/0070663).
As to claim 8: Defensive Publication discloses the claimed additive manufacturing system for forming a component (i.e., additive manufacturing apparatus 100 configured to construct an object 115) (Defensive Publication at page 4, lines 8-10; FIG. 1), the additive manufacturing system comprising:
a deposition assembly having a deposition head through which melted feedstock material is deposited (i.e., material source 106 includes a material spool and feeder system configured to convey material wires, e.g., metal or polymer-based wires, to a deposition head 102) (Defensive Publication at page 4, lines 18-20; page 5, lines 3-5; FIG. 3);
a compression rig comprising a compression head supporting a top roller applying a compressive load onto a top surface of the component (i.e., compression load device 113 includes an actuator 117 and a load source 118, where the load source 118 includes a roller for applying a compressive load to the deposition material deposited on the build plate 112 or object 115) (Defensive Publication at page 6, line 17 – page 7, line 6; FIG. 1),
a temperature sensor positioned on a side of the top roller and detecting a temperature of the top surface of the component (i.e., temperature sensor 120 configured to check a surface temperature of the layer of deposition material deposited) (Defensive Publication at page 7, line 22 – page 8, line 6; FIG. 1), and
a controller configured to adjust a position of the compression rig and a load applied by the top roller based on the detected temperatures and distances (i.e., the controller 124 is configured to control the compression load device 113 based on the measurements of the temperature sensor 120; if a measurement of the temperature sensor 120 indicates that a deposition material at a location on the build plate 112 or object 115 is not suitable, the controller 124 transmits control signals to the actuator 117 of the compression load device 113 to adjust a positioning of the load source 118 relative to the build plate 112 or the object 115) (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 12-22; FIG. 1).
As discussed above, Defensive Publication discloses temperature sensor 120 configured to check a surface temperature of the layer of deposition material deposited) (Defensive Publication at page 7, line 22 – page 8, line 6; FIG. 1). Defensive Publication also discloses the additive manufacturing apparatus 100 including a stress sensor 122, where the stress sensor 122 and the temperature sensor 120 are disposed on the actuator 117 on respective sides of load source 118 (Defensive Publication at page 7, lines 22-23; FIG. 1). Though, Defensive Publication fails to disclose the claimed pair of temperature sensors positioned on opposite sides of the top roller and detecting a temperature of the top surface of the component, and a pair of distance sensors positioned on opposite sides of the top roller and detecting a distance to the top surface of the component.
Moreover, Defensive Publication discloses a build plate 112 disposed on base 110, and base 110 including an actuator that moves the build plate 112 relative to the deposition head 102 in the Z-direction (Defensive Publication at page 4, lines 14-17; FIG. 1); though, Defensive Publication fails to disclose the claimed rotary build table rotatable about a vertical axis of the rotary build table, the rotary build table defining a horizontal build surface on which the component is built.
However, Schneider teaches an arrangement 2 for additive manufacturing having a printing arrangement 4, wherein the printing arrangement 4 has a sensor arrangement 8 arranged leading in the printing direction and a sensor arrangement 8 arranged trailing the printing direction (i.e., pair of sensors positioned on opposite sides of a device) (Schneider at [0031], FIG. 3). Schneider further teaches two redundant distance sensors being used in the sensor arrangement for ascertaining a distance d from the arrangement 2 to the applied printing material 22, and/or two redundant temperature sensors (i.e., pair of temperature sensors positioned on opposite sides of the top roller and detecting a temperature of the top surface of the component; and pair of distance sensors detecting a distance to the top surface of the component) (Schneider at [0020], [0027], [0031], FIG. 3).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the pair of distance sensors positioned on opposite sides of a device detecting a distance and a pair of temperature sensors positioned on opposite sides of a device detecting a temperature as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Schneider above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way, with the additional benefit of the pair of distance and temperature sensors positioned on opposite sides of the device achieves higher accuracy and reliability (as recognized by Schneider at [0020]).
Defensive Publication, modified by Schneider, discloses a build plate 112 disposed on base 110, and base 110 including an actuator that moves the build plate 112 relative to the deposition head 102 in the Z-direction (Defensive Publication at page 4, lines 14-17; FIG. 1); though, Defensive Publication fails to disclose the claimed rotary build table rotatable about a vertical axis of the rotary build table, the rotary build table defining a horizontal build surface on which the component is built.
However, Corsmeier teaches an apparatus for additive manufacturing including a build platform, and the build platform being rotating (Corsmeier at [0026], FIG. 3). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize a rotating build platform as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Corsmeier above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is a simple substitution of one known element (i.e., non-rotating build platform) for another (i.e., rotating build platform) to obtain predictable results.
As to claim 9: Defensive Publication and Schneider and Corsmeier disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 8. Defensive Publication, modified by Schneider, further reads on the claimed wherein the pair of temperature sensors comprises: a first temperature sensor positioned in front of the top roller downstream of a direction of travel and detecting a first temperature of a first portion of the top surface of the component (Defensive Publication at page 7, lines 22-23; FIG. 1); and a second temperature sensor positioned behind the top roller upstream of the direction of travel and detecting a second temperature of a second portion of the top surface of the component (Schneider at [0020], [0031], FIG. 3), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 8.
As to claim 12: Defensive Publication, Schneider and Corsmeier disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 8. Schneider further reads on the claimed wherein the pair of distance sensors comprises: a first distance sensor positioned in front of the top roller downstream of a direction of travel and detecting a first distance to a first portion of the top surface of the component (Schneider at [0020], [0031], FIG. 3); and a second distance sensor positioned behind the top roller upstream of a direction of travel and detecting a second distance to a second portion of the top surface of the component (Schneider at [0020], [0031], FIG. 3), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 8.
As to claim 13: Defensive Publication, Schneider and Corsmeier disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 12. Defensive Publication, modified by Schneider, further discloses the claimed wherein the controller is configured to compute a strain in the component based on the first distance and the second distance (i.e., stress sensor 122 measures a residual stress in the layer of deposition after the counterbalancing treatments are performed via the compression load device 103; and with a measured residual stress, the strain present in the layer of deposition after the compression load device 103 has performed counterbalancing treatments can be acquired given strain is the measure of deformation resulting from stress and therefore is directly related to the determined stress) (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3).
As to claim 14: Defensive Publication, Schneider and Corsmeier disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 13. Defensive Publication further discloses the claimed additive manufacturing system further comprising: a linear actuator for positioning the top roller relative to the top surface (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3), wherein the controller is configured to: send a signal to the linear actuator to move the top roller closer to the top surface in response to determining that the strain is below a predetermined strain range (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3); and send a signal to the linear actuator to move the top roller farther from the top surface in response to determining that the strain exceeds the predetermined strain range (Defensive Publication at page 6, lines 17-23; page 8, lines 12-22; page 9, lines 3-16; FIG. 3).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Defensive Publication, Schneider and Corsmeier as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Garcia Grau et al. (US 2022/0134669; herein referred to as Garcia Grau).
As to claim 10: Defensive Publication, Schneider and Corsmeier disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 9. Defensive Publication, modified by Schneider and Corsmeier, discloses the controller 124 being configured to determine if a temperature of the deposition material is suitable for a treatment via the compression load device (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 4-8); though, modified Defensive Publication fails to explicitly disclose the claimed wherein the controller is configured to compute an average temperature based on the first temperature and the second temperature.
However, Garcia Grau teaches an additive manufacturing apparatus using a first thermal sensor 108 and a second thermal sensor 110 to measure the target temperatures of print bed 104 (Garcia Grau at [0022]), and the measurements acquired using the first sensor 108 and the second sensor 110 are transmitted to a processor 112 for processing an average temperature (Garcia Grau at [0027]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the processor configured to compute an average temperature based on the first temperature and second temperature as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Garcia Grau above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 11: Defensive Publication, Schneider, Corsmeier and Garcia Grau disclose the additive manufacturing system of claim 10. Defensive Publication, modified thus far, further discloses the claimed additive manufacturing system further comprising: an actuator for positioning the compression head relative to the deposition head (Defensive Publication at page 6, line 17 – page 7, line 1; FIG. 3), wherein the controller is configured to: send a signal to the actuator to move the compression head closer to the deposition head in response to determining that the average temperature is below a predetermined temperature range (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 4-8; page 8, lines 12-17; FIG. 3); and send a signal to the actuator to move the compression head farther from the deposition head in response to determining that the average temperature exceeds the predetermined temperature range (Defensive Publication at page 8, lines 4-8; page 8, lines 12-17; FIG. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAILEIGH K. DARNELL whose telephone number is (469)295-9287. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, MST.
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 H. 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.
/BAILEIGH KATE DARNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights