DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-15 have been presented for examination based on the application filed on 5/23/2023.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20220121788 A1 by ANDREE; Horst Christian et al..
Claim(s) 5, 12 & 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220121788 A1 by ANDREE; Horst Christian et al., in view of US 20200166909 A1 by NOONE; Jordan et al.
See relevant Prior Art of record for further discussing Boolean operations.
This action is made Non-Final.
---- This page is left blank after this line ----
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 8-9 are 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.
Claims 8-9 state:
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of receiving a prioritization order for the plurality of compartments.
9. The method of claim 4, wherein calculating a base shell volume of the housing using Boolean operations on the bounding volumes is based on the prioritization order.
Its unclear how the prioritization of a compartment affects the Boolean operation. In other words, if the goal is to compute the total internal volume of the shell, A and B being volumes of the two shells, and A and B overlap, the AՍB - A∩B = AՍB - B∩A. The prioritization of B over A or A over B in computing intersection yields the same result. Its unclear what prioritization does.
---- This page is left blank after this line ----
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 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)(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.
(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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20220121788 A1 by ANDREE; Horst Christian et al..
Regarding Claim 1
Andree teaches A method for configuring a housing (Andree: [0028] [0031]-[0034]) for an assembly to be manufactured (Andree: [0030]"... the method also includes a production of the object based on the construction model of the object. The construction model is transmitted to a production facility for the actual production of the object....") via a simulation of the assembly and housing in a computer assisted drafting (CAD) environment (Andree: [0057], [0059]) , the assembly comprising a plurality of housed components (Andree: Fig.3 & [0057] "... [0056] FIG. 3 schematically illustrates component volume models 26 for certain components 16 of object 10, such as for gear unit housing 26a, motor shaft 26b, gear shaft 26e and gear unit housing 26d....") , and the housing comprising a plurality of compartments configured to house the plurality of housed components and at least one opening between two neighboring compartments (Andree: [0056]-[0057] Fig.3
PNG
media_image1.png
722
994
media_image1.png
Greyscale
) , comprising the steps of:
receiving a plurality of parameters defining respective aspects of the assembly and the housing (Andree: [0009]);
based on the plurality of parameters:
creating a plurality of bounding volumes, each bounding volume corresponding to one of the plurality of compartments (Andree: at least in Fig.2 showing bounding volume as interior space (cavity 24) in the two compartments 20a and 20d); and
defining a bridging between a first compartment and a second compartment of the plurality of compartments (Andree: Fig.3 as annotated above showing bridging volume between the compartments 16a and 16d) ;
calculating a base shell volume of the housing using Boolean operations on the bounding volumes (Andree: Fig.6 & [0074]-[0076], merging and superimposing) ;
calculating a topological volume from the base shell volume (Andree: topological model include cavities which on the outside to access the srews, shafts etc, [0053] "... [0053] Object 10 and/or components 16 thereof have cavities 18 and/or depressions 18′, which are either completely enclosed or connected to an environment of object 10 [outside the model] . ..."; [0055], [0029] "... [0029] According to example embodiments, a component volume model has a depression, a cavity and/or a concave region. If a volume model is created from a construction model in which merely an outer shape of the construction model is determined, then it is possible that holes will be covered which project into the object and into which screws, shafts, etc., are inserted, for example. For this reason, component volume models are additionally provided, which are adapted, for instance, by the design engineer of the construction model....") ; and
determining a housing assembly model based on the topological volume (Andree: [0087]-[0088]) .
Regarding Claim 2
Andree teaches wherein the plurality of parameters comprise at least one of the group consisting of housing component parameters, housed component parameters, and external component parameters (Andree: [0009]-[0011]) .
Regarding Claim 3
Andree teaches further comprising the step of parametrically linking a housing component with a parameter a parent assembly model (Andree: [0072]"... Basic component volume models 26 are adapted as a function of further configuration parameters 22 in order to configure component volume models 26, for instance by changing lengths, adding and/or omitting parts....") .
Regarding Claim 4
Andree teaches further comprising the step of combining the final housing assembly model with the parent assembly model (Andree: [0087], [0076]).
Regarding Claim 6
Andree teaches further comprising a parametric link between a first parameter of a first component of the plurality of components and a second parameter of a second component of the plurality of components (Andree: [0025] "... [0025] According to example embodiments, physical parameters are allocated to every component volume model. These physical parameters are also allocated to the volume model of the object...."; [0072] "... Basic component volume models 26 are adapted as a function of further configuration parameters 22 in order to configure component volume models 26, for instance by changing lengths, adding and/or omitting parts...."; [0018]"... [0018] The basic models are used as the starting point for generating the concrete models from the configuration parameters. Using a housing length as a configuration parameter, for example, the length of the housing in the corresponding basic model is scaled in order to obtain the concrete model. The manner in which the basic model has to be modified based on the configuration parameters in order to generate the respective concrete model is stored in the basic models....") .
Regarding Claim 7
Andree teaches further comprising the steps of; receiving a revised first parameter (Andree: [0072]) ; and determining a revised housing assembly model based on the revised first parameter (Andree: [0072]) .
Regarding Claim 8
Andree teaches further comprising the step of receiving a prioritization order for the plurality of compartments (Andree: [0075][0076] & [0026] prioritization as overriding based on material type ).
Regarding Claim 9
Andree teaches wherein calculating a base shell volume of the housing using Boolean operations on the bounding volumes is based on the prioritization order (Andree: [0076], [0075]).
Regarding Claim 10
Andree teaches wherein the plurality of parameters comprise geometric datum and/or numeric parameter sets (Andree: "... [0009] According to example embodiments, the method includes receiving configuration parameters for the object, the configuration parameters indicating the components that make up the object and/or the type of the respective component. The configuration parameters indicate the structure of the object. Among these are parameters such as existing and non-existent components and variants of components of the object. More specifically, the configuration parameters include the lengths and/or types of housing components of the object....") .
Regarding Claim 11
Andree teaches where the geometric datum and numeric parameter sets of a housed component or an external component that are the same as a housing component are available for a parametric link (Andree: [0009]-[0010] "... [0010] In general, the components of the object are the parts that make up the object. For instance, the components include housing parts, shafts, flanges, bearings, gear wheels, electrical coils and/or magnets...."; [0018] "... Using a housing length as a configuration parameter, for example, the length of the housing in the corresponding basic model is scaled in order to obtain the concrete model....") .
Regarding Claim 14
Andree teaches further comprising the step of parametrically linking a housing component with a housed component parameter (Andree: [0072]) .
Regarding Claim 15
Andree teaches further comprising the step of parametrically linking a housing component with an external component parameter (Andree: [0034] showing shaft as external component as well as housing component as it goes inside the housing assembly) .
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5, 12 & 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220121788 A1 by ANDREE; Horst Christian et al., in view of US 20200166909 A1 by NOONE; Jordan et al.
Regarding Claim 5
Teachings of Andree is shown in the parent claim 1. Andree teaches manufacturing the model (Andree: [0087]-[0088]) .
Andree does not teach manufacturing assembly using CNC.
Noone teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of: receiving the final housing assembly model by a computer numerical control (CNC) machine (Noone: [0014] Figs. 3A-3C showing a CAD model) , and manufacturing a housing according to the final housing assembly model with the CNC machine (Noone: [0219] "... For example, in an embodiment in which a manufacturing process such as a CNC machining process has been configured to fabricate a rocket engine combustion chamber comprising a plurality of narrow slots and through holes, the training data set for the machine learning algorithm used to detect and classify object defects; and control applied forces, tool rotational rates, tool translational rates may comprise process simulation data, process characterization data, in-process inspection data, post-build inspection data, or any combination thereof, for brackets, gears, housings, etc., that differ from the combustion chamber being fabricated in terms of design and/or material....") .
It would have been obvious to one (e.g. a designer) of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Noone to Andree as Noone complements in the manufacturing of housing design (e.g. as seen in Fig.3A) based on the CAD model. The motivation to combine would have been that Noone not only suggest the manufacturing by CNC using the CAD model, but also defect classification (Noone: [0218]-[0220]) to improve the end process. Further motivation to combine would be Noone and Andree are analogous art to the instant claim in the field of design and manufacturing of housing for parts (Noone: rocket combustion chamber in [0219] and Andree: gear box housing in Fig.1).
Regarding Claim 12
Andree teaches further comprising the step of determining a range of a material properties for the manufactured housing (Andree: [0026] "... [0026] According to example embodiments, the physical parameters include material parameters. The material parameters include a material type, a material, a thermal conductivity, and/or a weight. During the aggregation, a rule specifies for different material types of components which components overwrite the material type of another component if the volumes of the components overlap. The same applies to the thermal conductivity, for example. In the case of an object having different material parameters, a volume model having intermediate surfaces is generated which separates regions of different material parameters...."). Motivation to combine is similar to claim 5 above.
Regarding Claim 13
Andree teaches further comprising the step of determining a list of suitable materials and/or manufacturing parameters for the manufactured housing based on the range of material properties (Andree: [0028] "... In addition, it is checked which materials of what objects come into contact with one another, for instance, in order to exclude contact between hot objects and plastic materials....") . Motivation to combine is similar to claim 5 above.
Relevant Prior Art of Record
US 20190197205 A1 & US 20190197773 A1 by Schmidt; Martin-Pierre et al. (Assignee: Dassault Systemes) disclose a method which includes superposing a regular tiling of cells with a solid representation of the 3D part, partitioning the cells into two groups, a first group of cells, each in contact with the solid representation, and a second group of cells, none in contact with the solid representation. The method also includes computing a Boolean union of the first group of cells and the solid representation, the Boolean union forming a volume, finite element meshing the volume of the computed Boolean union while preserving the set of faces of the first group of cells that are shared with the second group of cells, and merging the finite element meshes of the cells of the second group and the meshed volume of the computed Boolean union.
US 5351196 A by Sowar; Richard M. et al. (1994) teaches Delta volumes are created automatically using a solid modeling Boolean operation to subtract the part model from the stock model (Col.4 Lines 33-38 & Fig.4),
---- This page is left blank after this line ----
Conclusion
All claims are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Examiner’s Note: Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
---- This page is left blank after this line ----
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKASH SAXENA whose telephone number is (571)272-8351. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7AM-3:30PM.
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, RYAN PITARO can be reached on (571) 272-4071. 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.
AKASH SAXENA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2188
/AKASH SAXENA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2188 Friday, September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights