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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/10/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 31-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s):
31. A method of monitoring metal pieces produced by an additive manufacturing system comprising a build platform, a material dispensing mechanism to dispense metallic powder on the build platform, and a sensor supporting structure configured to move across the build platform, and at least one NDT sensor affixed to the sensor supporting structure, wherein the NDT sensor moves above a calibration standard several times during the additive manufacturing of a metal piece in order to retrieve a calibration dataset associated with an additive manufacturing run.
Step 1: The claim recites a method of monitoring metal pieces produced by an additive manufacturing system, which is a process. Thus, the claim is to a new and useful process, which is a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A Prong One: The limitation of “moves above a calibration standard several times during the additive manufacturing of a metal piece in order to retrieve a calibration dataset associated with an additive manufacturing run” falls into the “mental process” group of abstract ideas, because the moving of the calibration standard could practically be performed physically or in the human mind.
Step 2A Prong Two: Besides the abstract idea, the claim recites the additional elements of a build platform, a material dispensing mechanism to dispense metallic powder on the build platform, and a sensor supporting structure configured to move across the build platform, and at least one NDT sensor affixed to the sensor supporting structure. Each of these additional elements are recited with a high level of generality. As such, they are nothing more than an attempt to link the use of the judicial exception to the technological environment of an additive manufacturing system. Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is directed to the judicial exception.
Step 2B: The claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the recited exception. The additional elements cited in Step 2A Prong Two were considered insignificant. The limitation cited in Step 2A Prong One therefore remains insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration. Thus, the limitation does not amount to significantly more. Even when considered in combination, the additional elements are merely insignificant extra-solution activity, which does not provide an inventive concept. The claim is not eligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, 16-18, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DehghanNiri et al. [DehghanNiri] (US PGPub 2018/0036964), in view of Zhang et al. [Zhang] (US PGPub 2020/0069282), and further in view of Girndt (US Patent No. 8,214,161).
As to claim 1
DehghanNiri discloses a method of monitoring metal pieces produced by an additive manufacturing system (additive manufacturing apparatus, see paragraph 0036, lines 1-2) comprising a build platform (build platform 112, see Fig. 1), a material dispensing mechanism (dispensing section 120, see Fig. 1) to dispense metallic powder (powder 130, see Fig. 1) on the build platform, and a sensor supporting structure (recoating blade 150, see Fig. 1) configured to move across the build platform, wherein N or M Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) sensors (scanner 160 including an array of scanning elements 161, see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0039, lines 3-4) are mounted on the sensor supporting structure next to each other along an axis substantially perpendicular to the direction of the displacement of the supporting structure (see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0039, lines 9-10), the method comprising the steps of:
- generating, on a computing device (data processing system; see paragraph 0052, line 4), a 3D digital model (digital model; see paragraph 0001, line 3/3D CAD models; see paragraph 0053, line 4) of at least one metal piece to be produced by the additive manufacturing system (see paragraph 0053, lines 1-5), and
N NDT sensors being configured to be:
mounted on the sensor supporting structure at specific locations along said axis (see paragraph 0039, lines 9-10).
However, DehghanNiri fails to specifically disclose the method comprising:
- identifying regions of interest in the 3D digital model where defects are more likely to occur during the additive manufacturing of said at least one metal piece, wherein said regions of interest are identified using a software configured to check said 3D digital model according to specific design rules; and
N NDT sensors being configured to:
selectively activated among a total of M NDT sensors,
wherein said N NDT sensors are selectively activated or mounted on said specific locations as a function of the regions of interest identified in the 3D digital model in order to retrieve data on the properties of the quality of metal parts of the metal piece only for the corresponding regions of interest of the metal piece during its additive manufacturing.
Zhang discloses a method comprising:
- identifying regions of interest (find regions of interest (ROIs); see paragraph 0101, line 8) in a 3D digital model (overview image; see paragraph 0101, lines 2-3) where defects (abnormalities; see paragraph 0101, line 9) are more likely to occur (see paragraph 0101, lines 7-9), wherein said regions of interest are identified using a software (CAD algorithms; see paragraph 0101, line 8) configured to check said 3D digital model according to specific design rules (see paragraph 0101, lines 7-9).
Girndt discloses a method comprising:
N NDT sensors (group of sensors 110A, 110B, 110C, 110D; see Fig. 3) being configured to be:
selectively activated among a total of M NDT sensors (see column 6, lines 14-16),
wherein said N NDT sensors are selectively activated or mounted on said specific locations as a function of the regions of interest identified in the 3D digital model in order to retrieve data on the properties of the quality of metal parts (see column 6, lines 12-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify DehghanNiri’s invention with Zhang’s and Girndt’s in order to use software to find areas where anomalies are likely and move sensors to those areas, since doing so would save time by scanning only specific areas for defects.
As to claim 2
DehghanNiri and Girndt disclose the method of claim 1, wherein said N NDT sensors are selectively activated or mounted on said specific locations also as a function of the position of the sensor supporting structure relative to the build platform (see Girndt column 6, lines 12-34).
As to claim 3
DehghanNiri and Girndt disclose the method of claim 1, wherein said N NDT sensors are selectively activated or mounted on said specific locations also as a function of the position on the build platform where said at least one metal piece is to be manufactured and as a function of the build layer (see Girndt column 6, lines 12-34).
As to claim 6
DehghanNiri, Zhang, and Girndt disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the manufacturing system further comprises a multiplexer configured to selectively activate N NDT sensors among said M NDT sensors mounted on the sensor supporting structure, and a control unit configured to control the multiplexer, during the additive manufacturing of the metal piece, as a function of:
- the identified regions of interest (see Zhang paragraph 0101, lines 7-9),
- the position of the sensor supporting structure on the build platform (see Girndt column 6, lines 12-16), and
- the build layer of the metal piece being manufactured (see Girndt column 6, lines 12-16).
As to claim 7
DehghanNiri discloses the method of claim 6, wherein M is at least 100 and N is comprised between 4 and 16, and wherein N varies for each layer or for some layers constituting the metal piece (see paragraph 0049, lines 11-18).
As to claim 8
DehghanNiri discloses the method of claim 6, the control unit comprising a processor, wherein the 3D digital model of the metal piece to be produced is converted into a build job file comprising data of identified regions of interest in the form of program codes, the build job file being sent from the computing device to the control unit to be executed by the processor for causing the control unit to control the multiplexer as a function of the identified regions of interest and as a function of the position of the sensor supporting structure on the build platform (see paragraph 0055, lines 3-28).
As to claim 16
DehghanNiri discloses the method of claim 1, wherein said N NDT sensors are eddy current sensors (see paragraph 0038, lines 9-10).
As to claim 17
DehghanNiri and Girndt disclose an additive manufacturing system (additive manufacturing apparatus, see paragraph 0036, lines 1-2) for additive manufacturing of at least one metal piece and for monitoring said metal piece, the system comprising:
- a build platform (build platform 112, see DehghanNiri Fig. 1) actuable along a vertical (Z) axis and on which said at least one metal piece is to be manufactured,
- a material dispensing mechanism (dispensing section 120, see DehghanNiri Fig. 1) for dispensing metallic powder (powder 130, see DehghanNiri Fig. 1) on the build platform, and
- a sensor supporting structure (recoating blade 150, see DehghanNiri Fig. 1) configured to move across the build platform, wherein NDT sensors (scanner 160 including an array of scanning elements 161, see DehghanNiri Fig. 1 and paragraph 0039, lines 3-4) are mounted on the supporting structure next to each other along an axis (X-axis) substantially perpendicular to the direction (Y-axis) of the displacement of the sensor supporting structure (see DehghanNiri Fig. 1 and paragraph 0039, lines 9-10),
wherein said N NDT sensors are configured to retrieve data on the properties of the quality of metal parts of the metal piece corresponding of the regions of interest identified by the method of claim 1 (see Girndt column 6, lines 12-34).
As to claim 18
DehghanNiri discloses the system of claim 17, further comprising a material dispensing platform comprising a bed of metallic powder and wherein said sensor supporting structure is a recoater configured to move the metallic powder from the material dispensing platform over the build platform layer by layer (see paragraph 0043, lines 14-17).
As to claim 20
DehghanNiri, Zhang, and Girndt disclose the system of claim 17, wherein the recoater comprises at least 100 NDT sensors the system further comprising a multiplexer configured to selectively activate N NDT sensors among said at least 100 NDT sensors, a control unit configured to control the multiplexer and a measurements unit connected to the multiplexer to retrieved data on the property of the quality of metal parts of the at least one metal piece corresponding to the selected regions of interest of said at least one metal piece (see Girndt column 6, lines 14-16).
As to claim 21
DehghanNiri discloses the system of claim 17, wherein NDT sensors are eddy current sensors (see paragraph 0038, lines 9-10).
As to claim 22
DehghanNiri discloses a tangible computer product containing a build job file in the form of program codes to be executed by the processor of the method of claim 8 (see paragraph 0055, lines 3-28).
Claim(s) 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DehghanNiri et al. [DehghanNiri] (US PGPub 2018/0036964) in view of Girndt (US Patent No. 8,214,161).
As to claim 28
DehghanNiri discloses a method of monitoring metal pieces produced by an additive manufacturing system (additive manufacturing apparatus, see paragraph 0036, lines 1-2) comprising a build platform (build platform 112, see Fig. 1), a material dispensing mechanism (dispensing section 120, see Fig. 1) to dispense metallic powder (powder 130, see Fig. 1) on the build platform, a sensor supporting structure (recoating blade 150, see Fig. 1) configured to move across the build platform, and a build volume, wherein N or M NDT sensors (scanner 160 including an array of scanning elements 161, see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0039, lines 3-4) are mounted on the supporting structure next to each other along an axis (X-axis) substantially perpendicular to the direction of the displacement (Y- axis) of the sensor supporting structure (see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0039, lines 9-10), the method comprising the steps of:
- generating, on a computing device (data processing system; see paragraph 0052, line 4), a 3D digital model (digital model; see paragraph 0001, line 3/3D CAD models; see paragraph 0053, line 4) of the build volume comprising at least one metal piece to be produced by the additive manufacturing system and one or more support structures supporting one or more parts of said at least one metal piece (see paragraph 0053, lines 1-5), and
- including in at least one support structure at least one control geometry;
N NDT sensors (scanner 160, see Fig. 1) being configured to be:
mounted on the sensor supporting structure at specific locations along said axis (X-axis) (see paragraph 0039, lines 9-10),
However, DehghanNiri fails to specifically disclose the method comprising:
N NDT sensors being configured to:
selectively activated among a total of M NDT sensors,
wherein said N NDT sensors are selectively activated or mounted on said specific locations as a function of the location of the control geometries in one or more of said support structures in the 3D digital model of the build volume in order to retrieve data on the properties of the quality of the control geometries included in at least one support structure during its manufacturing.
Girndt discloses a method comprising:
N NDT sensors (group of sensors 110A, 110B, 110C, 110D; see Fig. 3) being configured to be:
selectively activated among a total of M NDT sensors (see column 6, lines 14-16),
wherein said N NDT sensors are selectively activated or mounted on said specific locations as a function of the location of the control geometries in one or more of said support structures in the 3D digital model of the build volume in order to retrieve data on the properties of the quality of the control geometries included in at least one support structure during its manufacturing (see column 6, lines 12-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify DehghanNiri’s invention with Girndt’s in order to move sensors to those areas where there may be anomalies, since doing so would save time by scanning only specific areas for defects.
As to claim 29
DehghanNiri and Girndt disclose the method of claim 28, wherein said N NDT sensors are selectively activated or mounted on said specific locations also as a function of the position of the sensor supporting structure on the build platform (see Girndt column 6, lines 12-34).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-27 and 30 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
In regards to claim 23
DehghanNiri, Zhang, and Girndt fail to specifically disclose the method comprising:
-selecting empty regions in the build volume, wherein each empty region has a volume larger than 10x10x10 mm3, and
-generating 3D digital models of control geometries in the empty regions,
as a function of the position of said 3D digital models of control geometries in the corresponding empty regions of the 3D digital model of the build volume and as a function of the position on the build platform where said control geometries are to be manufactured
in order to retrieve data on the properties of the quality of metal parts of said control geometries during their additive manufacturing without directly sensing the at least one metal piece during its additive manufacturing.
Accordingly, independent claim 23 and the claims which depend upon it (claims 24-27) are allowable over the prior art.
In regards to claim 30
DehghanNiri, Zhang, and Girndt fail to specifically disclose the method comprising:
modifying in the 3D digital model of the build volume the position and/or orientation of the 3D digital model of the at least one metal piece so as to maximize the number of regions of interest that are located on an axis parallel to the X-axis of the sensor supporting structure before starting the additive manufacturing of said at least one metal piece.
Accordingly, independent claim 30 is allowable over the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 31-39 are allowable over the prior art and would be in condition for allowance with resolution to the above 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to claim 31
DehghanNiri fails to specifically disclose the method wherein the NDT sensor moves above a calibration standard several times during the additive manufacturing of a metal piece in order to retrieve a calibration dataset associated with an additive manufacturing run.
Accordingly, independent claim 31 and the claims which depend upon it (claims 32-39) are allowable over the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 4, 5, 9-15, and 19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
DehghanNiri, Zhang, and Girndt; individually or in combination; fail to specifically teach the method of claim 1, further comprising generating at least one 3D digital model of a functionalized support supporting a part of the 3D digital model of the metal piece, the functional support comprising a plurality of control geometries having different build layers at different heights, wherein the material property of each control geometry, once produced by additive manufacturing, is representative of the material property of a corresponding region of interest of the metal piece supported by said functionalized support, said region of interest belonging to the same build layer of the corresponding control geometry (in regards to dependent claim 4).
Accordingly, dependent claim 4 includes allowable subject matter.
DehghanNiri, Zhang, and Girndt; individually or in combination; fail to specifically teach the additive manufacturing system further comprising a calibration standard positioned in the manufacturing system such that said sensor supporting structure may move above the calibration standard, the method further comprising moving said sensor supporting structure one or more times during the additive manufacturing of the at least one metal piece to retrieve one or more calibration data for each of said N NDT sensors (in regards to dependent claim 9).
Accordingly, dependent claim 9 includes allowable subject matter.
DehghanNiri, Zhang, and Girndt; individually or in combination; fail to specifically teach the system of claim 18, further comprising a discharge opening for discharging the excess of metallic powder and a calibration standard, wherein the discharge opening is positioned between the build platform and the calibration standard such that the recoater is arranged to move across the discharge opening to remove the excess of metallic powder and then above the calibration standard (in regards to dependent claim 19).
Accordingly, dependent claim 19 includes allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael J. Brown whose telephone number is (571)272-5932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 5:30am-4:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Lee can be reached at (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.
/Michael J Brown/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115