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 claims 19-26 in the reply filed on 01/09/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 27-37 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 01/09/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 objected to because of the following informalities: “for at least irradiation section”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 19-26 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.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the raw material powder layer" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the scanning vectors" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the irradiation section" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the raw material powder layer" in lines 3-4 and 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the scanning vectors" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the irradiation section" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the raw material powder layer" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 19, 21, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by MAURER et al. (DE102017126624).
Regarding claim 19, MAURER et al. discloses a method of controlling an
irradiation system for irradiating layers of a raw material powder with a radiation beam in order to produce a three-dimensional work piece, the method comprising:
an irradiation pattern 60 is recognized, the irradiation pattern 69 is passed on (rectangular) irradiation fields arranged in a chess field, wherein each field is assigned a specific exposure path comprising a plurality of scan vectors. On the inside (left in 12) One recognizes an arrangement of two types of (core) exposure paths 71k . 73k , where the solid lines indicate irradiation with inskin parameters. The exposure paths 71k . 73k are exemplarily rotated by 90 ° to each other and cause a melting of the powder in the intended for the core circumference. In general, it is customary to carry out such a subdivision of a layer into irradiation fields, wherein different irradiation parameters, in particular for homogenizing the volume energy input in the irradiation plan, can be defined for the irradiation fields (defining, for at least one raw material powder layer to be irradiated, a scanning pattern comprising a plurality of irradiation sections, wherein, within each of the plurality of irradiation sections, a plurality of scanning vectors is defined, according to which the radiation beam is scanned across the raw material powder layer);
depending on the angle of the overhang (downskin area), a degree of the further irradiated areas and in particular of the parts 51A, 51B be selected in the order direction. The treatment plan may be designed such that the transition from the inskin (on-solid area) parameters to the varied laser parameters is no longer exactly the course of the contour line 50B ' follows, but the chess field structure remains as largely as possible. In the exemplary implementation according to 12 become all the fields through which the contour line 50B ' runs as a whole with the reduced laser power irradiated. Accordingly falls only in the area of the contour line 50D ' a subdivision of the fields in irradiated and non-irradiated area. In other words, the chess fields which touch the downskin area or in which the preceding layer was at least partially not irradiated are exposed with reduced power. The irradiation process can be accelerated so on. (defining, for each of the plurality of irradiation sections, a scanning order direction according to which the scanning vectors within the irradiation section are scanned one after another, wherein, for at least one irradiation section which contains a downskin area, the scanning order direction is defined so as to point from an on-solid area in a direction of the downskin area).
Regarding claim 21, MAURER et al. discloses the overhang angles up to 30º or less.
Regarding claim 26, MAURER et al. discloses irradiating one after another wherein the second irradiation section has a downskin area coverage that is larger than a downskin area coverage of the first irradiation section (Figs.10-12).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by SCHWARZE et al. (2015/0174827).
Regarding claim 19, SCHWARZE et al. discloses a method for controlling an irradiation system comprising:
performing an analysis of the arrangement of the radiation pattern according to which the radiation beams emitted by the irradiation units are guided over the layer of raw material powder received on the carrier and/or a contour of the three-dimensional work piece to be produced relative to the irradiation areas and the overlap (downskin) area defined on the surface of the carrier [0056], each of the plurality of irradiation sections have a plurality of scanning vectors [0059];
defining, for each of the plurality of irradiation sections, a scanning order direction according to which the scanning vectors within the irradiation section are scanned one after another, wherein, for at least one irradiation section which contains a downskin (overlap) area, the scanning order direction is defined so as to point from an on-solid area in a direction of the downskin (overlap) area [0066]-[0067], [0070].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20 and 22-25 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
a) SCHWARZE et al. (2015/0158111) discloses a method and device for controlling an irradiation system.
b) STENGEL et al. (2019/0077086) discloses a method for calibrating an irradiation system of an apparatus for producing a three-dimensional work piece.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STELLA KIM YI whose telephone number is (571)270-5123. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
STELLA YI
Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/STELLA K YI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742