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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 11-13, 15, 17-18, 20-22, and 30-36 are pending. Claims 32-36 are new. Claims 17-18 remain withdrawn.
In view of the amendment/remarks, filed 04/28/2026, the prior art rejections from the previous Office Action are maintained.
New grounds of rejection are necessitated by claim amendments to add new claims.
Claim Interpretation
Claim interpretation is consistent with the prior Office Actions.
Independent claim 11 is directed to an additive build assembly including a modular build plate and a plurality of build parts. The positively recited “plurality of build parts” are interpreted as part of the structure of claim 11. Regarding the recitation of “with the build parts being formed via an additive build process,” it is noted that the patentability of a product (build parts) does not depend on its method of production, only the structure implied by the steps. In this case, “formed via an additive build process” does not require or imply any specific structure for the product. Similarly, in claim 15, “the additive build process comprises a powder bed fusion process” does not require or imply specific structure for the product(s) recited.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 11-13, 15, 20, 30, and 33-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakash, US 20180345649 A1, in view of Robichaud, US 20200055240 A1, and Zehavi et al., US 20170072467 A1 (references of record).
Regarding claim 11, Prakash discloses an additive build assembly (Abstract, Fig. 1) comprising:
A modular build plate (base, Fig. 4D, [0040]),
Said modular build plate including a plurality of build plate sections (sections formed by substantially ring shaped regions arranged concentrically, Fig. 4D, [0040]) to cooperatively define an additive build surface to receive build parts (the regions of the base being for depositing deposition material used for additive manufacturing, [0021]),
Wherein the plurality of build plate sections comprises a perimeter plate section (outermost ring, Fig. 4D) extending 360-degrees around an opening (circular ring extending 360 degrees around an opening defined inside the ring, Fig. 4D);
Wherein the plurality of build plate sections further comprise a plurality of inner build plate sections arranged in the opening (inner build plate sections internal to the outermost ring, Fig. 4D).
Prakash does not disclose the modular build plate includes a substrate supporting the plurality of build plate sections, at least one of the build plate sections being removably attached relative to the substrate to permit selective detachment of said at least one build plate section from others of said build plate sections, where each of the inner build plate sections is detachable from the substrate.
In the analogous art, Robichaud discloses modular build plate assemblies (Figs. 2-9) including a substrate (support plate 112, Figs. 2 and 7, [0067]) supporting a plurality of build plate sections (support blocks 130 removably mounted to support plate 112, Fig. 2, [0067]) defining an additive build surface to receive build parts (on which articles are to be additively built, [0007]), wherein each of the build plate sections is removably attached/detachable from the substrate (the support blocks 130 being removably engageable with the support plate 12, [0067], [0098], [0112], via coupling members 120 and 136, [0091], Figs. 2-5) to permit selective detachment of the build plate sections (removable engagement, [0098]). Robichaud discloses the support plate 112 can be removably mounted to a supporting surface of a base 111 of an additive manufacturing system (Fig. 2, [0071]-[0073]) and provides a substantially horizontal plane for supporting the plurality of build plate sections ([0077], [0089]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modular build plate of Prakash to include a substrate supporting the plurality of build plate sections, at least one of the build plate sections being removably attached relative to the substrate to permit selective detachment of said at least one build plate section from others of said build plate sections, where each of the inner build plate sections is detachable from the substrate, in order to provide a uniform supporting surface for the plurality of build plate sections that could be selectively removed and reattached to an additive manufacturing apparatus, as taught by Robichaud.
Prakash does not show that the assembly includes a plurality of build parts and each inner build plate section supports a respective one of the build parts. Prakash therefore does not disclose that the plurality of build parts comprises a plurality of discrete, non-concentric components.
Robichaud further discloses that the support blocks can have any shape or arrangement ([0097], [0116]) and are intended to support a respective one of a plurality of build parts (one or more printed articles being located on a respective support block, [0141]). Robichaud shows support blocks supporting a respective one of a plurality of build parts (Figs. 2, 7 where blocks 130 support additively manufactured parts 160 and 162) and teaches that dividing a bulky printed piece into individual articles printed on distinct support blocks facilitates machining and removal of the articles ([0126]-[0127]). Robichaud discloses the plurality of build parts comprises a plurality of discrete, non-concentric components (components 160, 162 in Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further specify for the combination that the assembly includes a plurality of additively built build parts, each inner build plate section supporting a respective one of the build parts, and the plurality of build parts comprising a plurality of discrete, non-concentric components based on the intended function of the build plate sections to support printed objects and for ease of subsequent processing and part removal as taught by Robichaud. With the inner build plate sections each supporting respective build parts, then the disclosed detachability of these sections would permit physical separation of the respective build parts from one another if the parts were connected.
The combination discloses the build plate forms an enclosing lower surface for the build area and that the perimeter plate section is configured to detach from a remainder of the modular build plate. The combination does not limit the build parts to a particular structure.
The combination does not disclose the additive build assembly further comprises a canister formed via the additive build process, and that the perimeter plate section supports the canister. The combination therefore does not disclose the modular build plate encloses the build parts and unused powder from the build process in the canister; wherein the perimeter plate section and the canister are configured to detach from a remainder of the additive build assembly to separate the unused powder in the canister from the build parts.
In the analogous art of additive manufacturing (Abstract), Zehavi discloses additively forming a canister (enclosure 428) along the outer perimeter of an underlying support structure (Figs. 4D-4F, [0010], [0108]-[0110]). Zehavi discloses the support structure and the canister enclose the build parts and unused powder from the additive build process in the canister (Figs. 4E-4F) and are ultimately configured to detach from the rest of the additive assembly to separate the unused powder in the canister from the build parts ([0127]). Zehavi discloses forming the canister (enclosure 428) on the outer perimeter of the underlying support structure (Figs. 4D-4F). Zehavi teaches that the formation of the enclosure facilitates reclamation of greater quantities of powder by segregating powder used in forming the object or exposed to high temperatures ([0035]) and since its size can conform with the size of the built object ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the additive build assembly of Prakash such that the additive build assembly comprises a canister formed via the additive build process, that the perimeter plate section supports the canister, and the modular build plate encloses the build parts and unused powder from the additive build process in the canister, wherein the perimeter plate section and the canister are configured to detach from a remainder of the additive build assembly to separate the unused powder in the canister from the build parts, in order to realize the benefits of forming and utilizing a removable build enclosure specific to the actual build area to facilitate reclamation of greater quantities of powder, as taught by Zehavi.
Regarding claim 12, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11, and the combination discloses the substrate comprises a base plate (Robichaud: support plate 112, Figs. 2-3), with the build plate sections each being removably attached to the substrate by respective fasteners (Robichaud: the support blocks 130 being removably engageable with the support plate 12, [0067], [0098], [0112], via coupling members 120 and 136, [0091], Figs. 2-5).
Regarding claim 13, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 12, and Prakash further discloses the perimeter plate section is an outermost ring defining an outer margin of the modular build plate (Fig. 4D outermost ring).
Regarding claim 15, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 13. An additive build process is not a limiting element in the structure of the build assembly. Still, Prakash further discloses powder bed fusion (e.g., SLS/SLM, using powder material, [0020]-[0021]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11, and Prakash discloses some of the inner build plate sections define an annular inner ring nested within the opening (Fig. 4D inner annular rings).
Regarding claim 30, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11, and the combination discloses at least one of the build parts is supported entirely on a single respective inner build plate section and does not span across to an adjacent build plate section (per claim 11, the inner build plate sections each individually supporting discrete build parts, Robichaud: articles printed on a single support block, [0141]).
Regarding new claim 33, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11, wherein the build parts are entirely contained within an internal volume cooperatively defined by the canister and the modular build plate (per claim 11, the canister being at the outer perimeter of the modular build plate, and the canister and the build surface of the modular build plate defining an internal volume (e.g., see Zehavi Fig. 4E) containing a build area including the build parts).
Regarding new claim 34, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11, wherein the perimeter plate section and the canister are detachable together as a unit while the build parts remain supported on the respective inner build plate sections (per claim 11, each of the build plate sections, including the perimeter plate section, being detachable, see application of Robichaud for claim 11, e.g., [0098], and the canister being built on the perimeter plate section, see Zehavi Fig. 4E, such that the claimed capability is present).
Regarding new claim 35, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 34, wherein the inner build plate sections remain supported by the substrate when the perimeter plate section and the canister are detached from the additive build assembly (per claim 11, each of the inner and perimeter build plate sections being individually detachable from the substrate, see application of Robichaud for claim 11, e.g., [0098], such that the claimed capability is met).
Regarding new claim 36, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11, wherein the canister is supported by the perimeter plate section (per claim 11, “the perimeter plate section supports the canister”) at a location radially outward of the inner build plate sections (per claim 11, “the perimeter plate section extending 360 degrees around an opening” and the “plurality of inner build plate sections arranged in the opening,” see also Prakash Fig. 4D, where the perimeter plate section is the outermost ring section).
Claim(s) 21-22 and 31-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakash, US 20180345649 A1, in view of Robichaud, US 20200055240 A1, and Zehavi et al., US 20170072467 A1, as applied to claims 11 and 20 above, and further in view of Kohler et al., US 20200086580 A1 (of record).
Regarding claim 21, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 20. Prakash depicts the inner ring as formed by continuous circular build plate sections (Fig. 4D inner annular rings). However, Prakash discloses the build plate sections can have a variety of uniform or non-uniform shapes and sizes ([0040]).
Prakash does not disclose the inner ring is formed by a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate build plate sections.
In the analogous art of additive manufacturing (Abstract), Kohler discloses a circular support structure 126 including concentric rings formed by an array of support members 202 (Fig. 2B, [0028]). Kohler teaches configuring an inner circular ring from a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate sections (segmented array of support members 202, Fig. 2B, [0028], [0035]). Kohler teaches that doing so enables the provision of channels between support sections which may provide a pathway for cleaning out unused powder during post-fabrication processes as well as interrupt or isolate residual stresses in the support structure ([0028]) and that providing the support members as segments assists with interrupting or isolating residual stresses in the support structure caused by rapid changes in temperature during an additive manufacturing process ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inner ring of Prakash such that it was formed by a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate build plate sections forming a circular shape, instead of a continuous build plate section forming a circular shape, in order to facilitate cleaning during post-fabrication processes and/or to interrupt or isolate residual stresses in the support structure caused by temperature changes during the manufacturing process, as taught by Kohler.
Regarding claim 22, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 21, and Prakash further discloses one of the inner build plate sections is a circular innermost section (central circular region, Fig. 4D) nested within the inner ring (Fig. 4D).
Regarding claim 31, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11. Prakash depicts the inner ring shaped build plate sections as formed by continuous circular build plate sections (Fig. 4D inner annular rings). The combination does not disclose at least a subset of the inner build plate sections are arranged as a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate segments.
In the analogous art, Kohler teaches configuring circular build plate sections as a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate segments as set forth above for claim 21.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inner circular ring sections of Prakash to be arranged as a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate build plate sections forming a circular shape, instead of continuous build plate sections forming a circular shape, in order to facilitate cleaning during post-fabrication processes and/or to interrupt or isolate residual stresses in the support structure caused by temperature changes during the manufacturing process, as taught by Kohler.
Regarding new claim 32, modified Prakash discloses the limitations of claim 11. Prakash depicts the inner ring shaped build plate sections as formed by continuous circular build plate sections (Fig. 4D inner annular rings). The combination does not disclose none of the inner build plate sections completely circumscribes any other of the inner build plate sections.
In the analogous art, Kohler teaches configuring circular build plate sections as a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate segments as set forth above for claim 21.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inner circular ring sections of Prakash to be arranged as a series of circumferentially spaced arcuate build plate sections forming a circular shape, instead of continuous build plate sections forming a circular shape, in order to facilitate cleaning during post-fabrication processes and/or to interrupt or isolate residual stresses in the support structure caused by temperature changes during the manufacturing process, as taught by Kohler. Doing so would have resulted in none of the inner build plate sections, individually, completely circumscribing any other of the inner build plate sections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues (p. 5) that the rejection of claim 11 does not establish a prima facie obviousness case regarding the limitation “wherein the perimeter plate section and the canister are configured to detach from a remainder of the additive build assembly to separate the unused powder in the canister from the build parts.” Applicant argues (p. 5) that Prakash’s Fig. 4D merely depicts concentric ring-shaped thermal-control regions forming a base and Prakash does not disclose the outermost ring being removable from the remainder of the base. Applicant argues (p. 5) that Robichaud’s removable support blocks are not a 360-degree perimeter plate section surrounding inner build plate sections configured to detach with a canister. Applicant argues (pp. 5-6) that Zehavi does not teach building a canister on a detachable perimeter plate section surrounding multiple discrete, non-concentric build parts carried by respective removable inner build plate sections.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As set forth in the rejection of claim 11, Prakash discloses an assembly comprised of modular build plate sections including an outer build plate section that is a 360-degree perimeter plate section surrounding inner build plate sections. Robichaud teaches configuring a plurality of modular build plate sections to be individually detachable from a common planar substrate. As such, Prakash in view of Robichaud renders obvious individually detachable build plate sections arranged as concentric rings, including the outermost perimeter plate section. Prakash’s build plate is intended to serve as a build surface for additive manufacturing. Zehavi teaches forming a canister along the perimeter of a support surface for an additive manufacturing process that encloses all of the build material, including build parts and unused powder. The combination including Zehavi reads on the canister being positioned on the perimeter plate section, with the perimeter plate section being detachable from the remainder of the additive build plate assembly.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER L GROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am - 5pm ET.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
/J.L.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/LARRY W THROWER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights