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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd, IV US 2016/0263822A1 in view of YOROZU US 2020/0156322 A1.
YOROZU teaches:
10. (New) A method for discharging particulate building material in a 3D printer, in which the particulate building material is discharged from an applicator forming a building material curtain striking a building field creating a building material accumulation, the method comprising the steps of:
optical monitoring by generating an image of the particulate building material in the [para. 0046, “The shape sensor 207 may measure, for example, the dimensions in the x-axis, y-axis, and z-axis directions of a three-dimensional fabrication object. Examples of the shape sensor 207 include an infrared sensor, a camera, and a three-dimensional measurement sensor (for example, a light-cutting profile sensor).”]
YOROZU does not teach the printing of the “building material curtain” recited in the previous limitation, however, Boyd, IV teaches the 3d printing of building material curtain for use in manufacturing a building. See Fig. 1 structure 103.
YOROZU further teaches:
based on the generated image of the particulate building material, determining at least one dimension of the particulate building material; [para. 0046, “The shape sensor 207 may measure, for example, the dimensions in the x-axis, y-axis, and z-axis directions of a three-dimensional fabrication object.”]
comparing the generated image of the particulate building material with an associated reference image and/or the at least one dimension of the particulate building material with an associated reference value; [para. 0061, “Based on the measurement data representing the measured shape, the difference data calculation unit 352 calculates the difference between the reference shape 400 and the measured shape of the fabrication object as a deformation expressed by the displacement of the set representative points.”] and
if the generated image of the particulate building material deviates from the associated reference image and/or the at least one dimension of the particulate building material deviates from the associated reference value, [para. 0167, “The correction unit 360 corrects the fabrication data based on the measured shape data (difference data) calculated by the measured shape data generating unit 350 so that the fabricating operation performed by the fabricating-device control unit 330 is changed. In this specific embodiment, changing the fabrication operation includes changing the fabrication amount.”]
changing at least one discharge parameter associated with a quantity of the particulate building material to be discharged from the applicator. [para. 0168, “For example, in the FFF method, the fabricating-device control unit 330 performs control to change the discharge amount of the fabrication material 140.”]
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the teachings of Boyd, IV with those of YOROZU. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings because Boyd, IV teaches that an optical feedback controller can be used to 3d print a building in order to increase accuracy of the end result. (See para. 103).
YOROZU teaches:
11. (New) The method according to claim 10,
wherein the optical monitoring is from at least one direction onto the building material curtain and/or the building material accumulation, with the generated image representing at least a section of the building material curtain and/or the building material accumulation; [para. 0153, “The depth of a linear portion hit by the bright line can be obtained from one image taken by the imaging device. To obtain the depth of the entire measurement object, shooting is continuously performed while scanning the 3D scanner, depth information is calculated, and stereoscopic data is reconstructed.”] and
the generated image represents a side view, a front view and/or a perspective view. [para. 0120 and Fig. 17A show manufactured object view from shape sensor 207 viewpoint, “FIGS. 17A to 17D are illustrations of an edge (hereinafter referred to as “detected edge”) detected by the shape sensor 207. FIG. 17A is a cross-sectional view of a three-dimensional fabrication object fabricated. Here, assume a case where the shape sensor 207 detects an edge of the (n+1)th fabrication layer.”]
YOROZU teaches:
12. (New) The method according to claim 10, wherein the determined at least one dimension of the building material curtain is length, height, thickness or an angle between a surface of the building field and the building material curtain. [para. 0157, “The object shape measuring unit 340 as a measuring unit controls the shape sensor 207 and measures measurement data, such as dimensions and height, as the shape of a fabrication layer (fabrication object in the middle of fabrication) during fabrication or a three-dimensional fabrication object after fabrication.”]
YOROZU
13. (New) The method according to claim 10, wherein the determined at least one dimension of the building material accumulation is length, height, width, an interior angle or an angle of slope. [para. 0157, “The object shape measuring unit 340 as a measuring unit controls the shape sensor 207 and measures measurement data, such as dimensions and height, as the shape of a fabrication layer (fabrication object in the middle of fabrication) during fabrication or a three-dimensional fabrication object after fabrication.”]
YOROZU teaches:
14. (New) The method according to claim 10, wherein the at least one discharge parameter for the particulate building material changed is:
(i) a quantity of the particulate building material to be discharged per unit of time;
(ii) a quantity of the particulate building material to be discharged per area;
(iii) a movement speed of applicator of the 3D printer over a surface of the building field; or
(iv) a change in quantity of the particulate building material to be discharged over time. [para. 0165, “However, the fabrication amount (e.g., the discharge amount of the fabrication material 140 in the FFF method or the laser intensity and the spot diameter in the SLS method) can be corrected instead of the deformation of the shape or together with the deformation of the shape.”]
YOROZU teaches:
15. (New) The method according to claim 14, wherein the at least one discharged parameter for the particulate building material changed is the change in the quantity of the particulate building material to be discharged over time with a fixed frequency or a frequency which changes over time. [para. 0165, “However, the fabrication amount (e.g., the discharge amount of the fabrication material 140 in the FFF method or the laser intensity and the spot diameter in the SLS method) can be corrected instead of the deformation of the shape or together with the deformation of the shape.”]
YOROZU teaches:
16. (New) The method according to claim 10, wherein the optical monitoring of the particulate building material is divided into partial areas of the building material curtain and/or the building material accumulation. [para. 0153; scanning is focused on area being built]
YOROZU teaches:
17. (New) The method according to claim 16, wherein a sum of the partial areas covers an entire area of the building material curtain and/or an entire area of the building material accumulation. [para. 0153; scanning all partial views results in total view]
YOROZU teaches:
18. (New) The method according to claim 16, wherein the at least one discharge parameter for the discharge of the particulate building material are changed differently in the partial areas. [para. 0165, “However, the fabrication amount (e.g., the discharge amount of the fabrication material 140 in the FFF method or the laser intensity and the spot diameter in the SLS method) can be corrected instead of the deformation of the shape or together with the deformation of the shape.”]
Boyd, IV teaches:
19. (New) The method according to claim 14, wherein the changing of the at least one discharge parameter representing the quantity of the particulate building material to be discharged per unit of time and/or the quantity of the particulate building material to be discharged per area comprises the step of controlling a number of gas porous outlet associated with the applicator and/or a pressure of gas acting upon the gas porous outlet. [para. 0037, extruder uses gas for cooling]
YOROZU teaches:
20. (New) The method of claim 10, wherein the generated image is an image, a sequence of images or a video from the generated image. [para. 0153, “scanning speed” i.e. images over time]
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 23 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues a deficiency in the non-final office action of 03 April 2026 because YOROZU’s failure to teach the “building material curtain” limitation. Applicant’s claim is directed towards 3d printing a building and generically recites a feedback control using optical monitoring. The YOROZU reference was relied on because it teaches in detail a camera or optical based feedback control system for 3d printing. The Boyd reference is directed towards 3d printing a building and teaches that feedback sensors can be used to increase accuracy, including optical feedback (See para. 0103). Applicant’s claim does not require the “building material curtain” limitation to meet the claim because the claim recites “building material curtain” in the disjunctive (and/or) along with “building material accumulation.” Thus, although the reference does not teach measuring the curtain, it still meets the limitation because the reference clearly teaches the optical measurement of the accumulation material. See Fig. 10:
PNG
media_image1.png
748
1098
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The object shape measuring unit 340 acquires image data of the accumulated material to compare with the ideal (351) to provide a difference calculation (352) and correction control (360). Applicant’s arguments pointing to Boyd reference not teaching a material curtain are thus unpersuasive because the limitation recites “material curtain” in the disjunctive with “building material accumulation.”
Applicant argues next pg. 6 Remarks 23 June 2026 that the Yorozu reference also does not teach the material curtain which Examiner has acknowledge by using a strike thru in the office action. The Yorozu reference is relied on to teach the generic optical feedback control steps in a 3d printing system which is clearly suggested from the Boyd reference to use in combination to increase accuracy (Boyd, para. 103). Applicant argues insufficient motivation to combine by failure because the references “says nothing about monitoring a particulate building material curtain.” Again, the limitation was recited in the disjunctive and merely teaching an optical feedback control signal of the accumulated material is sufficient to meet the claim. Examiner suggests narrowing the claim to distinguish from the prior art as the invention as claimed is recited at a very high level of generality and appears to preempt a basic optical feedback control system. The 103 analysis was not improper hindsight analysis because the Boyd reference clearly contemplates the use of optical feedback control on a 3d building system to increase accuracy and the Yorozu reference fills in the detail of a generic optical control feedback system for 3d printing smaller desktop-sized shapes (but not a building). (YOROZU para. 0113, “In step S3003, the correction unit 360 applies measured shape data (difference data) calculated based on the fabrication data (plane shape) of the previous layer and the measurement data of the fabrication result (plane shape) as necessary, to correct the fabrication data. That is, the plane shape is corrected by feedback control.”)
Applicant next argues dependent claim 19 which recites control of “a number of gas porous outlets associated with the applicator and/or a pressure of gas acting upon the gas porous outlet.” It appears to argue structural differences for the material extruder as Boyd teaches the use of resin compound as build material. Examiner is not persuaded by this argument because in other sections of the reference teaches the use of air pressure and a compressor to feed into the extruder as well as a material feed system. (See Boyd, para. 0069). Para. 0074 also teaches the use of a pressure transducer to monitor internal pressure along with temperature sensors to precisely control the flow rate leaving the extruder.
Examiner notes that the final limitation is a condition precedent, and that although the prior art teach the condition along with the execution step, that the claim is broad can under BRI can be interpreted as not requiring this limitation to meet the claim (Schulhauser, Ex parte, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April 28, 2016).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-0473. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 1-930PM EST.
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, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571) 272-2279. 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.
/GARY COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
Prosecution Insights