DETAILED ACTION
In Response filed on 08/04/2025, claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-12 are currently amended. No claim is canceled, and no claim is newly added. Claim 19 is withdrawn. Claims 1-18 and 20 would be considered in this Office 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/19/2025 has been entered.
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 10, 14-15 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.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “a conventional scan path” in line 4. The underlined term “conventional” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “conventional” of the limitation is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Also, it is unclear whether the limitation “a conventional scan path” means (1) the same as “a/the scan path” (claim 1 line 3 or 5), or (2) another new/different scan path. For the purpose of examination, either of these interpretations would read on the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “a conventional transverse width of a conventional overlap region defined between adjacent conventional consolidated material tracks” in lines 7-8. The underlined term “conventional” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “conventional” of the limitation is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of examination, the limitation would be interpreted as “a conventional transverse width of a conventional overlap region defined between adjacent conventional consolidated material tracks formed via delivery of a constant amount of energy as a function of position along a scan path.”
Claim 14 recites the limitation “a variation in a transverse width of the corresponding overlap region is less than a conventional transverse width of a conventional overlap region defined between adjacent conventional consolidated material tracks” in lines 6-8. The limitation literally means (1) “the variation” is less than “the conventional transverse width.” However, as “the variation” in a width is likely to be less than “the width” in a controlled additive manufacturing system, it is questioned whether the Applicant intends to mean (2) a variation in a transverse width of the corresponding overlap region is less than a “variation” in a conventional transverse width of a conventional overlap region, or (3) a transverse width of the corresponding overlap region is less than a conventional transverse width of a conventional overlap region. For the purpose of examination, the literal interpretation (i.e., the first (1)) would read on the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “a conventional hatch distance defined by a plurality of conventional consolidated material tracks” in lines 8-9. The underlined term “conventional” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “conventional” of the limitation is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of examination, the limitation would be interpreted as “a conventional hatch distance defined by a plurality of conventional consolidated material tracks formed via delivery of a constant amount of energy as a function of position along a scan path.”
Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim 1-11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hamann (US 20210001561 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hamann discloses a method of additively manufacturing a manufactured component utilizing an additive manufacturing system (abstract; fig. 1), the method comprising:
supplying a feedstock material along a scan path of the additive manufacturing system (fig. 1; [0112-0124]: a storage container 14 for a building material 15, in this example a powder which can be solidified by electromagnetic radiation, and a recoater 16 which can be moved in a horizontal direction H for applying the building material 15 within the build area 8);
delivering, from an energy source (energy introduction device 20 including a laser 21) of the additive manufacturing system and to an addition location along the scan path, an amount of energy sufficient to form a melt pool of the feedstock material at the addition location (figs. 1, 2; [0116]: energy introduction device 20 including a laser 21 generates a laser beam 22 onto a working plane 7; [0032, 0079]: laser radiation; [0024, 0047, 0050]: solidification path corresponding to a line segment in the working plane along which the building material is solidified by continuously displacing the melt pool); and
during the delivering the amount of energy, moving the addition location along the scan path to move the melt pool along the scan path and define a consolidated material track from the feedstock material (figs. 1, 2; [0125]: a partial area 53 of the object with a scanned solidification path; [0024, 0047, 0050]: by forming a melt pool along the solidification path);
wherein the delivering the amount of energy includes varying the amount of energy as a function of position along the scan path (fig. 3b and [0126-0127]: radiation power per unit area during the movement of the radiation exposure area along the solidification path 64; fig. 4b and [0129]: the radiation power per unit area impinging on the building material increases linearly from the beginning 65A of the solidification path starting from a starting value until a maximum value is reached, which is maintained in order to be reduced linearly again in the solidification path section 652 towards the end 65E of the solidification path 65) to at least one of:
increase in uniformity of the consolidated material track as a function of position along a length of the scan path ([0126]: as a result, the component homogeneity at this location is improved); and
increase in uniformity of a consolidated material layer that is partially defined by the consolidated material track ([0129]: not only at the end but also at the beginning of the solidification path the homogeneity of the object can be improved).
Regarding claim 2, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the varying the amount of energy includes varying an input power of the amount of energy (figs. 2, 3b, 4b; [0126-0127, 0129]).
Regarding claim 3, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein, prior to the additively manufacturing the manufactured component, the method further includes forming a test component that differs from the additively manufactured component, wherein the forming the test component includes performing the supplying the feedstock material, the delivering the amount of energy, and the moving the addition location for a plurality of different preselected values of the amount of energy to additively manufacture the test component ([0032-0039]: predetermining a radiation impact area upon the incident radiation power per unit area by previous manufacturing processes or by preliminary tests in which test irradiations are carried out; [0049]: specifying energy introduction parameter values by preliminary tests, and during the preliminary tests, the output power of the radiation source, a local distribution of the radiation intensity per unit area within the radiation impact area, a speed of movement of the radiation impact area in the working plane, or the focusing depth of the radiation with respect to the working plane may be varied; [0050]: the examination of the type of welding process may be determined by observation of the radiation impact area by means of a camera, by analysis of the radiation emitted by the radiation impact area, or by analyses of test objects manufactured during preliminary tests), wherein the method includes analyzing the test component to generate a consolidated material track correlation that describes at least one geometric property of a transverse cross-section of the consolidated material track as a function of the plurality of different preselected values of the amount of energy, wherein the at least one geometric property of the transverse cross-section of the consolidated material track includes at least one of a transverse cross- sectional area of the consolidated material track, a transverse width of the consolidated material track, a maximum transverse width of the consolidated material track, and a penetration depth of the consolidated material track into a previously formed portion of the test component (id.: a radiation impact area, a reference value for the radiation power per unit area, a width/intersection of the solidification path as the extension of the radiation impact area perpendicular to the direction of movement of beam, the focusing depth of the radiation with respect to the working plane), and further wherein the varying the amount of energy during the additively manufacturing the manufactured component includes selectively varying the amount of energy based, at least in part, on the consolidated material track correlation (id.).
Regarding claim 4, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consolidated material track extends between an initiation location and a termination location, wherein the varying the amount of energy includes monotonically increasing the amount of energy as the melt pool moves from the initiation location to the termination location (fig. 4b; [0129]: the reference value for the radiation power per unit area impinging on the building material increases linearly from the beginning 65A of the solidification path starting from a starting value until a maximum value is reached; of note, here, any locations in a scan path meet the broadest reasonable interpretation of “an initiation location” or “a termination location” as long as the initiation location precedes the termination location in the scan path).
Regarding claim 5, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consolidated material track extends between an initiation location and a termination location, wherein the varying the amount of energy includes monotonically decreasing the amount of energy as the melt pool moves from the initiation location to the termination location (fig. 3b and [0126]: the solidification path section 642 the reference value for the radiation power ϕ per unit area impinging on the building material decreases linearly towards the end 64E of the solidification path; fig. 4b; [0129]: the reference value for the radiation power per unit area impinging on the building material reduces linearly again in the solidification path section 652 towards the end 65E of the solidification path 65; of note, here, any locations in a scan path meet the broadest reasonable interpretation of “an initiation location” or “a termination location” as long as the initiation location precedes the termination location in the scan path).
Regarding claim 6, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consolidated material track extends between an initiation location and a termination location, wherein the consolidated material track defines an initiation region, which is proximate the initiation location, a termination region, which is proximate the termination location, and a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region, wherein the varying the amount of energy as a function of position includes varying such that the amount of energy within the initiation region is at least one of: (i) greater than the amount of energy within the steady-state region (figs. 3b and [0126]: 64A as an initiation location/region, 64E as a termination location/region, and a steady-state region between 64A and 64E; fig. 5 and [0132]: A as an initiation location/region, E as a termination location/region, and a steady-state region between A and E); and (ii) greater than the amount of energy within the termination region (id.). Of note, here, any location in a scan path between an initiation location/region and a termination location/region meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region” as recited.
Regarding claim 7, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consolidated material track extends between an initiation location and a termination location, wherein the consolidated material track defines an initiation region, which is proximate the initiation location, a termination region, which is proximate the termination location, and a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region, wherein the varying the amount of energy as a function of position includes varying such that the amount of energy within the initiation region is at least one of: (i) less than the amount of energy within the steady-state region (fig. 6 and [0132]: A as an initiation location/region, E as a termination location/region, and a steady-state region between A and E); and (ii) less than the amount of energy within the termination region (id.). Of note, here, any location in a scan path between an initiation location/region and a termination location/region meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region” as recited.
Regarding claim 8, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consolidated material track extends between an initiation location and a termination location, wherein the consolidated material track defines an initiation region, which is proximate the initiation location, a termination region, which is proximate the termination location, and a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region, wherein the varying the amount of energy as a function of position includes varying such that the amount of energy within the termination region is at least one of: (i) greater than the amount of energy within the steady-state region; and (ii) greater than the amount of energy within the initiation region (fig. 6 and [0132]: A as an initiation location/region, E as a termination location/region, and a steady-state region between A and E). Of note, here, any location in a scan path between an initiation location/region and a termination location/region meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region” as recited.
Regarding claim 9, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consolidated material track extends between an initiation location and a termination location, wherein the consolidated material track defines an initiation region, which is proximate the initiation location, a termination region, which is proximate the termination location, and a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region, wherein the varying the amount of energy as a function of position includes varying such that the amount of energy within the termination region is at least one of: (i) less than the amount of energy within the steady-state region (figs. 3b and [0126]: 64A as an initiation location/region, 64E as a termination location/region, and a steady-state region between 64A and 64E; fig. 5 and [0132]: A as an initiation location/region, E as a termination location/region, and a steady-state region between A and E); and (ii) less than the amount of energy within the initiation region (id.). Of note, here, any location in a scan path between an initiation location/region and a termination location/region meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a steady-state region, which extends between the initiation region and the termination region” as recited.
Regarding claim 10, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the varying the amount of energy includes varying the amount of energy to increase the uniformity of the consolidated material track relative to a conventional consolidated material track formed via delivery of a constant amount of energy as a function of position along a conventional scan path ([0126]: as a result, the component homogeneity at this location is improved; [0129]: not only at the end but also at the beginning of the solidification path the homogeneity of the object can be improved). Of note, here, the improved homogeneity implies the uniformity of the consolidated material track is increased relative to the one formed by a conventional method of applying a constant amount of energy as a function of position along a scan path.
Regarding claim 11, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selectively varying the amount of energy includes selectively varying the amount of energy to increase at least one of:
(i) a transverse cross-sectional uniformity of the consolidated material track as a function of position along the length of the scan path; (ii) a transverse width uniformity of the consolidated material track as a function of position along the length of the scan path; (iii) a transverse shape uniformity of the consolidated material track as a function of position along the length of the scan path; and (iv) a transverse volume uniformity of the consolidated material track as a function of position along the length of the scan path ([0126]: as a result, the component homogeneity at this location is improved; [0129]: not only at the end but also at the beginning of the solidification path the homogeneity of the object can be improved; [0032-0039, 0045, 0050]: a radiation impact area, a reference value for the radiation power per unit area, a width/intersection of the solidification path as the extension of the radiation impact area perpendicular to the direction of movement of beam, the focusing depth of the radiation with respect to the working plane). Of note, here, the improved homogeneity implies that the uniformity of the consolidated material track is increased in consideration of at least one of a radiation impact area, a width/intersection of the radiation impact area, a focusing depth of the radiation impact area along the solidification path, which are related to a transverse cross-section of the consolidated material track.
Regarding claim 20, Hamann discloses non-transitory computer readable storage media including computer-executable instructions that, when executed, direct an additive manufacturing system to perform the method of claim 1 ([0009-0010, 0088-0089, 0096-0097, 0118]: computer-aided control method).
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.
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.
Claims 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamann (US 20210001561 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the method further includes repeating the moving to form a plurality of consolidated material tracks from the feedstock material, wherein each consolidated material track of the plurality of consolidated material tracks extends at least partially adjacent another consolidated material track of the plurality of consolidated material tracks such that the plurality of consolidated material tracks defines a corresponding overlap region (a contour line framing the cross-section) between each consolidated material track and the other consolidated material track (figs. 2, 10; [0005]: a hatch-like displacement pattern; [0030]: a hatch pattern/line, and the width of a contour line framing the cross-section subtracted from this diameter; [0077-0079]: varying the laser power to improve homogeneity at end points of hatch lines). Although Hamann does not explicitly disclose that a variation in a transverse width of the corresponding overlap region is less than a conventional transverse width of a conventional overlap region defined between adjacent conventional consolidated material tracks, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art that “a variation” in a transverse width of the corresponding overlap region is “at least” less than a transverse width of an overlap region as the variation therein cannot be the same or bigger than the transverse width itself when adjacent consolidated material tracks overlap each other, and furthermore, it would be also obvious to be less than a conventional transverse width of a conventional overlap region defined between adjacent conventional consolidated material tracks upon improved homogeneity in Hamann ([0126]: as a result, the component homogeneity at this location is improved; [0129]: not only at the end but also at the beginning of the solidification path the homogeneity of the object can be improved).
Regarding claim 15, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the method further includes repeating the moving to form a plurality of consolidated material tracks from the feedstock material, wherein each consolidated material track of the plurality of consolidated material tracks extends at least partially adjacent another consolidated material track of the plurality of consolidated material tracks such that the plurality of consolidated material tracks defines a corresponding overlap region between each consolidated material track and the other consolidated material track, wherein the plurality of consolidated material tracks defines a hatch distance between adjacent consolidated material tracks of the plurality of consolidated material tracks (figs. 2, 10; [0005]: a hatch-like displacement pattern; [0030]: a hatch pattern/line, and the width of a contour line framing the cross-section subtracted from this diameter; [0077-0079]: varying the laser power to improve homogeneity at end points of hatch lines). Although Hamann does not explicitly disclose that the hatch distance is greater than a conventional hatch distance defined by a plurality of conventional consolidated material tracks, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose an appropriate hatch distance which provides adjacent consolidated material tracks overlap sufficiently to eliminate gaps or voids therebetween while avoiding excessive remelting. Thus, when the homogeneity of the consolidated material tracks are improved in Hamann’s method than a conventional method of applying a constant amount of energy as a function of position along a scan path ([0126]: as a result, the component homogeneity at this location is improved; [0129]: not only at the end but also at the beginning of the solidification path the homogeneity of the object can be improved), it would have been obvious to have the hatch distance to greater than a conventional hatch distance without generating a void or gap between the adjacent consolidated material tracks so as to avoid excessive overlapping between adjacent consolidated material tracks, and thus to prevent an uneven surface, excessive remelting of feedstocks, or increased residual stresses in a consolidated part.
Regarding claim 16, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the scan path extends between an initiation location (a region around a starting point “A”) and a termination location (a region around an ending point “E”), wherein the scan path includes a turn-around region (figs. 2, 11; [0006-0007, 0125-0127]: turning area 55). Although Hamann does not explicitly disclose that wherein at least one of: (i) the initiation location is positioned between the termination location and the turn-around region; and (ii) the termination location is positioned between the initiation location and the turn-around region, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the initiation location or the termination location to be positioned are recited, depending on an outer boundary of a desired shape of a printed object in a respective layer. For example, if the outer boundary protrudes from the initiation location, (i) the initiation location would be positioned between the termination location and the turn-around region, and if the outer boundary is concaved from an initiation location, (ii) the termination location would be between the initiation location and the turn-around region, so as to additively manufacture an object with a desired shape.
Regarding claim 17, Hamann discloses the method of claim 16, wherein a first scan path segment extends between the initiation location and the turn-around region, wherein a second scan path segment extends between the turn-around region and the termination location, wherein the first scan path segment is at least substantially parallel to the second scan path segment (figs. 2, 11; [0006-0007, 0125-0127]).
Regarding claim 18, Hamann discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the first scan path segment is an at least partially linear first scan path segment, and further wherein the second scan path segment is an at least partially linear second scan path segment (figs. 2, 11; [0006-0007, 0125-0127]).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamann (US 20210001561 A1) in view of Snis (US 20130300035 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Hamann discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selectively varying the amount of energy includes utilizing at least one process parameter value for the additive manufacturing system [as an input to an energy variation model to predict a desired amount of energy as a function of position along the scan path] that increases the uniformity of the consolidated material track ([0020, 0071, 0078]: irradiation parameter values such as a diameter or a travel speed of a radiation impact area; [0032-0033, 0071]: an incident radiation power per unit area; claim 1: supplying radiation energy according to a set of energy introduction parameter values; [0126, 0129]: as a result, the homogeneity of a component is improved), wherein the selectively varying the amount of energy further includes delivering the desired amount of energy as a function of position along the scan path, and further wherein the method includes operating the additive manufacturing system according to the process parameter value during the delivering the amount of energy and the moving the addition location (id.).
Hamann does not specifically disclose the bracketed limitation(s) as presented above, i.e., “as an input to an energy variation model to predict a desired amount of energy as a function of position along the scan path,” but Snis teaches the limitation(s) as follows:
Snis teaches a method for manufacturing a three-dimensional body by successively providing powder layers and fusing together of selected areas of said layers (abstract, claim 11). The method includes selectively varying the amount of energy includes utilizing at least one process parameter value for the additive manufacturing system as an input to an energy variation model to predict a desired amount of energy (by calculating a temperature in the at least one powder layer along the intended beam path as a function of a specific energy deposition of an imaginary beam that is assumed to move along the intended beam path, by solving a time dependent heat equation) as a function of position along the scan path that increases the uniformity of the consolidated material track (claims 11, 13-20; [0028]: to obtain a homogeneous temperature distribution (which improves the product properties by reducing stress and crack formation) and to speed up the production (which makes the production more cost-effective))
In the same field of endeavor of additive manufacturing of an object by applying an energy to a feedstock material and consolidating the feedstock material, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the step of varying the amount of energy as a function of position along a scan path to further include a step of predicting a desired amount of energy based on an energy variation model (i.e., a model of calculating a temperature of a powder layer upon applying an imaginary beam along an intended beam path) as taught by Snis in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of simulating the effect of varying the amount of energy applied to a feedstock material in an intended operating operation scheme and thus, enabling to predict the microscopic (e.g., line-by-line or layer-by-layer) structural characteristics of a 3D printed object, so as to improve a homogeneity of the printed object (Snis: derived from [0028]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Hamann discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the process parameter value includes at least one of: (i) an input power of the amount of energy (Hamann: [0032-0033, 0071]: an incident radiation power per unit area; Snis: [0016-0020]: operating scheme including how each of the speed, power, and spot size, or real beam is supposed to vary with time); (ii) a spot size of the amount of energy (Hamann: [0020]: irradiation parameter values such as a diameter of a radiation impact area; Snis: [0018-0020]); (iii) a speed of motion of the addition location along the scan path during the moving (Hamann: [0020, 0071, 0078]: irradiation parameter values such as a travel speed of a radiation impact area; Snis: [0018-0020]); (iv) a hatch distance of the scan path relative to an adjacent scan path (Hamann: [0030]: a hatch line/distance; Snis: [0018-0020]); and (v) a feedstock material composition of the feedstock material.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 and 12-13 filed on 08/04/2025 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 prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Martinsen (US 20170320168 A1) teaches methods including directing a laser beam to a target along a scan path at a variable scan velocity and adjusting a digital modulation during movement of the laser beam along the scan path and in relation to the variable scan velocity so as to provide a fluence at the target within a predetermined fluence range along the scan path (abstract, figs. 1-3).
Mattes (US 20210245251 A1) teaches a method and a control data generating device for generating control data for an additive manufacturing device (abstract, fig. 5).
Chapman (US 20210323090 A1) teaches additive manufacturing system, adjusting the parameters of the focused energy beams during a build process based on the position of a build part relative to a beam emitter (abstract, fig. 1, [0023]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Inja Song whose telephone number is (571)270-1605. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM 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, SAM ZHAO can be reached on (571)270-5343. 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.
/INJA SONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights