DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Remarks
2. Claims 1-20 have been examined and rejected. This is the first Office action on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meess et al (U.S. Patent No. 10,620,611).
4-1. Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Meess teaches the claim comprising: receiving a three-dimensional digital model file of an object for construction utilizing a plurality of additive manufacturing devices, by disclosing receiving a 3D model of an object for printing [column 8, lines 4-5, 13-21].
Meess teaches determining a decomposition of the three-dimensional digital model file into a plurality of portions of the object, by disclosing slicing the 3D model into a series of layers and dividing each layer into multiple portions [column 8, lines 36-51].
Meess instructing each additive manufacturing device from the plurality of additive manufacturing devices to generate at least one portion from the plurality of portions of the object, wherein the plurality of additive manufacturing devices operate in parallel to generate the plurality of portions of the object; and constructing the object with the plurality of portions of the object generated by the plurality of additive manufacturing devices, by disclosing using the multiple portions to define one or more toolpaths for additive manufacturing robots [column 10, lines 16-18]. Toolpath information includes information describing the route each of the two or more additive manufacturing robots travel in the build volume to fabricate the object and the amount of filament to deposit to form each layer of the object [column 8, lines 7-12]. Multiple robots work in parallel in a shared build volume on one or more objects [column 11, lines 1-5].
4-2. Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Meess teaches all the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15 respectively, further comprising: receiving at least one additional requirement for the decomposition of the three-dimensional digital model file into the plurality of portions of the object, by disclosing receiving user input to set the thickness of each layer [column 8, lines 39-41]. One or more seams is determined based on one or more separation starting points, which are determined based on a set of requirements [column 9, lines 23-62].
Meess teaches analyzing the three-dimensional digital model file to identify a general shape for the object and a plurality of individual components of the general shape for the object, by disclosing analyzing the 3D model to generate fabrication information for the object [column 8, lines 15-17], which includes information that describes the boundaries of each portion of each layer in the build volume as well as a geometric surface of the perimeter of the series of layers [column 10, lines 39-50]. This would provide an overall shape of the 3D object. Such a shape would be used in determining load balancing information, which includes the estimated workload to fabricate the object that is based on the complexity of the 3D model [column 9, lines 33-37]. The load balancing information is used to determine separation points, which determine the portions the object is divided into [column 8, lines 44-51; column 9, lines 23-28].
4-3. Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Meess teaches all the limitations of claims 2, 9, and 16 respectively, wherein determining the decomposition of the three-dimensional digital model file into the plurality of portions of the object is based on the at least one additional requirement and the analysis of the three-dimensional digital model file, by disclosing that the one or more seams is determined based on one or more separation starting points, which are determined based on a set of factors such as number of layers that compose the 3D model of the object, complexity of the 3D model, rate of extrusion of a filament, thickness of each layer, threshold acceptable print time, and location of corners in the layers [column 9, line 23 to column 10, line 12].
4-4. Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Meess teaches all the limitations of claims 2, 9, and 16 respectively, wherein the at least one additional requirement is selected from the group consisting of: a shape volume for each portion of the object, a number of portions of the object, usage velocity, filament variety, veracity measurements, longevity value, a time value, and a user specified requirement, by disclosing that the one or more seams is determined based on one or more separation starting points, which are determined based on a set of factors such as number of layers that compose the 3D model of the object, complexity of the 3D model, rate of extrusion of a filament, thickness of each layer, and threshold acceptable print time, [column 9, lines 23-62]. The user may specify the layer thickness [column 8, lines 39-41], the location of a seam [column 9, lines 29-30], and the threshold acceptable print time [column 9, lines 53-55].
4-5. Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Meess teaches all the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15 respectively, wherein constructing the object with the plurality of portions of the object further comprises: instructing one or more assembly devices to perform a plurality of movements and actions to construct the object with the plurality of portions of the object, wherein each movement from the plurality of movements is selected from the group consisting of: positioning, placing, disposing, fusing, bonding, connecting, and interlocking a first portion from the plurality of portions of the object with a second portion from the plurality of portions of the object, by disclosing that the toolpath information includes information describing the route each of the two or more additive manufacturing robots travel in the build volume to fabricate the object and the amount of filament to deposit to form each layer of the object [column 8, lines 7-12]. Filament extruded by different robots can become chemically bonded, physically bonded or mechanically interlocked at the seams [column 9, lines 10-14].
4-6. Regarding claims 6, 13, and 20, Meess teaches all the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15 respectively, wherein each portion from the plurality of portions of the object interlocks with at least one other portion from the plurality of portions of the object, by disclosing that seams join different portions of the object and the filament extruded by the different robots can become mechanically interlocked at the seams [column 9, lines 9-14].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meess et al (U.S. Patent No. 10,620,611) in view of Shinar et al (Pub. No. US 2015/0201499).
6-1. Regarding claims 7 and 14, Meess teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 8 respectively. Meess does not expressly teach the claim further comprising: verifying construction of the object with the plurality of portions of the object generated by the plurality of additive manufacturing devices with respect to the three-dimensional digital model file of the object. Shinar discloses utilizing 3D-printing with multiple 3D-printing heads [paragraph 4]. An Automatic Optical Inspection (AOI) module verifies in real time that 3D printer is indeed 3D-printing with the required accuracy and that there is no deviation from the predefine operation due to tolerance drift or malfunction [paragraph 202]. Additionally, a verification module is provided to ensure that all points on a 3D-printed object, that were intended to be inter-connected, are indeed inter-connected [paragraph 205]. This would help ensure the object is printed correctly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to verify construction of the object, as taught by Shinar. This would help ensure the object is printed correctly.
Conclusion
7 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8595. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALVIN H TAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118