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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/23/2026 has been entered.
Status of the application
This is a non-final rejection in response to the Applicant's remarks and amendment filed on 04/23/2026. Claim 1 is currently amended, claims 2-9, 11-13, 15-17 are previously presented, claims 10, 14 and 23-50 are cancelled, and claims 18-22 are withdrawn. Accordingly claims 1-9, 11-13 and 15-17 are examined herein.
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.
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, 4-6, 8-9,11-12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jau (US 2019/0358895) in view of Panas (US 2021/0146628).
Regarding claim 1, Jau teaches a method of reducing performance deviation in at least one additive manufacturing apparatus (100) during production of parts, each apparatus having a light source (140) configured for polymerizing a light polymerizable resin (a liquid forming material contained in a tank (120)) with sequential doses of patterned light (L1a) to produce a three-dimensional (3D) part, the light source having assigned nominal emission data and actual emission data (see Figs. 1-2 and 3A; [0021-0023] and [0038]), the method comprising:
determining a change in cure characteristics of the light polymerizable resin across wavelengths (i.e. a light characteristic required for curing the 3D object is determined based on wavelength-absorptivity relationship of the liquid forming material across wavelengths) (see S01 in Fig. 1; [0009] and [0021]);
determining an expected cure-through and overcure (post-curing) for the resin based on wavelengths of the assigned nominal emission data (i.e. determining a light characteristic required for curing the 3D object), wavelengths of the actual emission data of the light source and the cure characteristics of the light polymerizable resin (liquid forming material) across wavelengths (i.e. to determine the output powers of the light-emitting elements according to the wavelength-absorptivity relationship of the liquid forming material) (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 3D; [0009], [0031] and [0039-0043]); adjusting/modifying at least some of said light doses in said at least one apparatus during production of said parts to match the light of the required characteristic (see [0009], [0040] and [0043]).
However, Jau does not explicitly teach modifying at least some of said light doses in said at least one apparatus during production of said parts based on a deviation of wavelengths of said actual light source emission data from said assigned nominal emission data and the cure characteristics of the light polymerizable resin across wavelengths.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing methods, Panas teaches a method for an additive manufacturing using an additive manufacturing system (10) (Abstract; Fig. 1), the method comprises providing a container (20) includes a photocurable resist (18) for making a 3D part, and the resist is responsive to an optical curing beam (16) from a light source (18) (see Fig. 1; [0054]); using a controller (12) has one or more predetermined volumetric resist cure maps (28) (the cure map includes assigned nominal emission data of the light beam) (see Fig. 1; [0025]); providing a cure monitoring control system configured to communicate with the controller for in situ monitoring a curing of the resist and generating data (actual light source emission data) useful for modifying the optical curing beam to help control curing of the 3D component (see [0011]). The cure monitoring control system provide feedback which enables modifying the curing beam (16) in real time to optimize curing of the resist (18) as the 3D part is made (i.e. modifying at least some of said light doses based on the detected optical signals) (see [0028]). The cure monitoring control system includes an optical signal source (32) which generates optical signals (34) having a wavelength selected in relation to a characteristic of the resist (18) (see Figs. 1-2; [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the method as taught by Jau in view of Panas by providing a cure monitoring control system configured to monitor a curing of the resist based on a deviation of wavelengths of said actual light source emission data from said assigned nominal emission data and the cure characteristics of the light polymerizable resin across wavelengths and generating data useful for modifying the optical curing beam to help control curing of the 3D component as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Panas above; and doing so is applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so would provide in situ monitoring a curing of the resist and generating data useful for modifying the optical curing beam to help control curing of the 3D component and to optimize curing of the resist (see [0011-0012]).
Regarding claim 4, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein said actual emission data is predetermined (i.e. the cure map (28) determines volumetric intensity map determines the volumetric curing map within the resist and software (26) include one or more predetermined volumetric resist cure maps (28)) (see Fig. 2;[0025] and [0030] of Panas).
Regarding claim 5, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein said actual emission data is periodically determined contemporaneously for manufacturing objects with a specific resin batch with said at least one additive manufacturing apparatus (the controller (12) is in communication with the curing monitoring system for detecting the actual emission data with a specific resin batch with the additive manufacturing apparatus (see [0025], [0028] and [0030] of Panas).
Regarding claim 6, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein said apparatus includes at least one light sensor (optical sensing source (32)) operatively associated with said light source (14), and said actual emission data is periodically determined with said at least one light sensor (see Fig. 2; [0027-0029] of Panas).
Regarding claim 8, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein said actual emission data and said nominal emission data consists of a single parameter comprising an emission spectra peak value (see Fig. 2 and 3D; [0021-0022] and [0031] of Jau).
Regarding claim 9, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein said actual emission data and said nominal emission data comprise multi-parameter data comprising one or more of an emission spectra peak value in combination with a full width at half maximum value; a set of intensity values measured at a plurality of pre-determined wavelength values; an integrated spectral power, and a spectral density distribution (see Fig. 2 and 3D; [0009], [0031] and [0039-0043] of Jau; [0025-0026] and [0030] of Panas).
Regarding claim 11, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein said modifying comprises: when the resin photosensitivity is greater at the actual light source emission data than at the nominal data, then the exposure dose is decreased and/or overcure and cure-through compensations are increased (see [0043] of Jau; [0025-0026], [0028] of Panas); and when the resin photosensitivity is less at the actual light source emission data than at the nominal data, then the exposure dose is increased and/or overcure and cure-through compensations are reduced (i.e. the controller 12 uses the error cure map to adjust the curing beam (16), for example by increasing or reducing a power level associated with the curing beam (16), in a manner to help optimize the curing of the resist (18)) (see [0026], [0028] and [0042] of Panas).
Regarding claim 12, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein said resin photosensitivity comprises resin total absorption, resin onset of cure (Fc or Dc), or a combination thereof (see Fig. 2;[00008-0010], [0021-0022] and [0031-0035] of Jau).
Regarding claim 15, Jau in view of Panas further teaches the method, wherein: all of said at least one additive manufacturing apparatus (100) are producing a same part (see Fig. 3B;[0009-0010] and [0021] of Jau).
Claim(s) 2-3 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jau (US 2019/0358895) in view of Panas (US 2021/0146628) as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Tumbleston (US 2020/0276765 – of record).
Regarding claim 2, Jau in view of Panas teaches the method as discussed in claim 1 above.
Jau in view of Panas does not teach wherein said at least one additive manufacturing apparatus comprises a group of individual additive manufacturing apparatus, all assigned the same nominal emission data, and said modifying step comprises: modifying said light doses in each individual apparatus to compensate for a deviation of said actual light source emission data of each individual apparatus from the nominal light source emission data assigned all of said apparatus.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing processes, Tumbleston teaches a method of enhancing at least one performance characteristic of a plurality of additive manufacturing apparatuses during production of an object on each apparatus, each apparatus including a light source and a controller containing operating instructions for production of the object on that apparatus (see [0006]), all assigned the same nominal emission data (see Figs. 1-5; [0025]), and said modifying step comprises modifying operating instructions includers at least one modified process parameter selected from: light intensity; light exposure duration; inter-exposure duration; speed of production (see Fig. 1; [0047])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the method as taught by Jau and Panas in view Tumbleston of with at least one additive manufacturing apparatus comprises a group of individual additive manufacturing apparatus, all assigned the same nominal emission data, and said modifying step comprises: modifying said light doses in each individual apparatus to compensate for a deviation of said actual light source emission data of each individual apparatus from the nominal light source emission data assigned all of said apparatus as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Tumbleston above; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so would enhance a performance characteristic of an additive manufacturing apparatus such as accuracy during additive manufacturing (see [0002-0003] of Tumbleston).
Regarding claim 3, Jau in view of Panas and Tumbleston further teaches the method, wherein all of said apparatus are loaded with a same polymerizable resin for said modifying step (see Fig. 1;[0025] and [0047] of Tumbleston).
Regarding claim 16, Jau in view of Panas teaches the method as discussed in claim 15 above.
Jau in view of Panas does not teach wherein said parts are produced to tolerance of plus or minus (+/-) 100 micrometers or less.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing processes, Tumbleston teaches method of enhancing a performance characteristic of an additive manufacturing apparatus, comprises producing object from the batch of light polymerizable resin on the additive manufacturing apparatus with the modified operating instructions (Abstract), wherein where the object(s) made require production at a high level of accuracy, within close tolerances (see [0131]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the method as taught by Jau in view of Tumbleston with wherein said parts are produced to tolerance of plus or minus (+/-) 100 micrometers or less as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Tumbleston above; and doing so is applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so will allow for production of 3D parts at a high level of accuracy.
Regarding claim 17, Jau in view of Panas teaches the method as discussed in claim 1 above.
Jau in view of Panas does not teach wherein said parts comprise an electrical connector, a mechanical connector, a fluid connector, a microelectronic device, a mechanical or micromechanical device, a fluidic or microfluidic device, a dental model, a dental model die, a dental appliance, a dental appliance thermoforming mold, or a surgical guide.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing processes, Tumbleston teaches method of enhancing a performance characteristic of an additive manufacturing apparatus comprising producing the object from the batch of light polymerizable resin on the additive manufacturing apparatus (Abstract), wherein examples of such objects include, but are not limited to: patient-specific forms, guides, aligners, models, or implants (e.g., a dental aligner, a dental model, a dental die, a surgical guide such as for orthopedic surgery, an implantable stent, etc.); connectors, such as electrical connector housings (see [0131]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the method as taught by Jau in view of Tumbleston with wherein said parts comprise an electrical connector, a fluid connector, a mechanical or micromechanical device, a dental model, a dental model die, a dental appliance, a dental appliance thermoforming mold, or a surgical guide as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Tumbleston above; and doing so is applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so will allow for production of 3D parts at a high level of accuracy.
Claim(s) 7 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jau (US 2019/0358895) in view of Panas (US 2021/0146628) as applied to claims 5 and 11 above, and further in view of Luan (US 2021/0247735 – of record).
Regarding claim 7, Jau in view of Panas teaches the method as discussed in claim 5 above.
Jau in view of Panas does not teach wherein said actual emission data is periodically determined with an empirical model, a first principles model, or a combination thereof from:
(i) previously measured light source emission data; and (ii) actual light source use data, and optionally at least one other apparatus use data
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing process, Luan teaches an additive manufacturing process, comprises performing thermal prediction intensity correction with first-principle based models or empirical models (see [0047]). Luan discloses a camera image may be utilized to adjust the thermal image that was predicted based on the intensity correction derived from the measured infrared camera image (see [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the method as taught by Jau and i Panas n view of Luan with wherein said actual emission data is periodically determined with an empirical model, a first principles model as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Luan above; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so would improve a thermal prediction intensity correction.
Regarding claim 13, Jau in view of Panas teaches the method as discussed in claim 11 above.
Jau in view of Panas does not teach wherein exposure dose, overcure compensations, and/or cure-through compensations are increased or decreased based on a first principles model, an empirical model, or a combination thereof.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing process, Luan teaches an additive manufacturing process, comprises performing thermal prediction intensity correction with first-principle based models or empirical models (see [0047]). Luan discloses a camera image may be utilized to adjust the thermal image that was predicted based on the intensity correction derived from the measured infrared camera image (see [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the method as taught by Jau and Panas in view of Luan with the exposure dose, overcure compensations, and/or cure-through compensations are increased or decreased based on a first principles model, an empirical model, or a combination thereof as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Luan above; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the added benefits of doing so would improve a thermal prediction intensity correction.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The following prior arts made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Lopez (US 2021/0187862) teaches a method of making 3D object (31) from a light polymerizable resin (21), comprises determining a change in cure characteristics of the light polymerizable resin across wavelengths; determining an expected cure-through and overcure for the resin based on wavelengths of an assigned nominal emission data (see Fig. 1; [0053], [0056] and [0062-0063]).
Lin (US 2018/0348646) teaches a method for printing a three dimensional (3D) object, comprising performing multi-wavelength three dimensional (3D) printing using photoinhibition (Abstract).
Chimmalgi (US 2021/031451) teaches a method of additive manufacturing by stereolithography characterized by a transmission spectra curve having a low transmissivity region between first and second high transmissivity region, wherein wavelengths shorter than those of the low transmissivity region (Abstract;[0023-0024]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED K AHMED ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-0347. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM-7:30 PM.
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 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.
/MOHAMED K AHMED ALI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights