DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-21 are presented for examination.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings received on 2 June 2023 are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) – Indefiniteness
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 1-21 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “exclusively for printing dental devices, in particular dental models, impression trays and/or aligners,”. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation “dental devices”, and the claim also recites “in particular dental models, impression trays and/or aligners” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 3 recites “wherein respectively one printing parameter package, in particular in the form of defined values for different printing parameters, is stored on the memory unit.” A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 3 recites the broad recitation “printing parameter package”, and the claim also recites “in particular in the form of defined values for different printing parameters” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 12 recites “based on an, in particular graphical and/or visualized, selection mask.” A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 12 recites the broad recitation “selection mask”, and the claim also recites “in particular graphical and/or visualized [selection mask]” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 13 recites “a printing head required according to the printing parameter package, in particular a nozzle of the printing head.” A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 13 recites the broad recitation “a printing head”, and the claim also recites “in particular a nozzle of the printing head” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 19 recites “a printing parameter package designed for the printing of the dental device, in particular in the form of defined values for different printing parameters.” A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 19 recites the broad recitation “a printing parameter package”, and the claim also recites “in particular in the form of defined values for different printing parameters” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Dependent claims 2-21 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d) – Improper Dependency
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 17 recites “17. A 3D filament printing apparatus of a dental printing system according to claim 1.” However, claim 1 already recites “having a 3D filament printing apparatus.” Therefore, claim 17 fails to further limit claim 1 upon which it depends.
Claim 18 recites “A method for producing dental devices, in particular dental models, impression trays and/or aligners, in particular by way of a dental printing system according to claim 1.” The phrasing “in particular by … according to claim 1” makes it unclear whether or not a system of claim 1 is required or not. Furthermore, a method as a series of steps is not a physical machine. Accordingly, claim 18 is also rejected for reason of failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Dependent claims 19-21 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 15, 17, 18, and 20
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 15, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US patent 6,129,872 Jang (cited in IDS dated 1 September 2023) [herein “Jang”] in view of US patent 10,179,035 B2 Shivapuja, et al. [herein “Shivapuja”] and US 2018/0071986 A1 Buller, et al. [herein “Buller”].
Claim 1 recites “1. A dental printing system, having a 3D filament printing apparatus exclusively for printing dental devices, in particular dental models, impression trays and/or aligners.” From the above list of alternatives Examiner is selecting “aligners.”
Jang column 7 lines 38-43 disclose:
a supply (e.g., a filament spool 22) of one primary body-building material 20 in filament form. The filament feeds through an upper inlet aperture 42 of a chamber 40 in a filament feeding device 15. Included in this chamber is a filament feeding channel 59 (shown to accommodate the filament 20)
Filament based printing is a filament printing apparatus.
Jang does not explicitly disclose aligners; however, in analogous art of 3D printing of aligners, Shivapuja title teaches “Direct 3D-printed orthodontic aligners.” An orthodontic aligner is a dental aligner.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang and Shivapuja. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use printing of aligners into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose because “Manufacturing the aligners by 3D-printing or additive manufacturing processes imparts novel geometries to the aligners for applying torque, rotation, and full 3D control forces to the teeth in novel ways.” See Shivapuja column 2 lines 61-65.
Claim 1 further recites “which 3D filament printing apparatus has a filament reservoir unit for receiving a filament.” Jang column 7 lines 38-43 disclose:
a supply (e.g., a filament spool 22) of one primary body-building material 20 in filament form. The filament feeds through an upper inlet aperture 42 of a chamber 40 in a filament feeding device 15. Included in this chamber is a filament feeding channel 59 (shown to accommodate the filament 20)
Claim 1 further recites “at least one printing head.” Jang column 7 lines 52-53 disclose “A dispensing nozzle 24 is disposed in close proximity to the filament feeding device 15.” The dispensing nozzle corresponds with a printing head.
Claim 1 further recites “and a control and/or regulation unit, having a display unit.” Jang does not explicitly disclose a display unit; however, in analogous art of 3D printing, Buller paragraph 373 teaches:
The historical and/or operative data may be displayed on a display unit. The display unit (e.g., monitor) may display various parameters of the printing system (as described herein) in real time or in a delayed time. The display unit may display the currently printed 3D object (e.g., in real time), the ordered printed 3D object, the actually printed 3D object or any combination thereof. The display unit may display the printing progress of the printed 3D object, or various aspects thereof. The display unit may display at least one of the total time, time remaining and time expanded on printing the generated 3D object.
The display unit corresponds with a display unit of a control or regulation unit.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a display unit into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models so that a user may be accessed and retrieved by an operator or user. See Buller paragraph 373.
Claim 1 further recites “and having a computing unit that is configured to convert a CAD file of the dental device into printing instructions and that comprises at least one memory unit.” Jang column 13 lines 18-27 disclose:
the CAD computer with its supporting software programs 132,134 operates to create a three-dimensional image 136 of a desired object or model and to convert the image into multiple elevation layer data 142 (a plurality of segments). Specifically, the image 136 of a three-dimensional object is converted into a proper format 138 utilizing commercially available CAD/Solid Modeling software 132,134. A commonly used format is the stereo lithography file (.STL), which has become a defacto industry standard for rapid prototyping.
Converting the CAD model into STL corresponds with converting a CAD file into printing instructions. The CAD computer corresponds with the control and/or regulation unit including at least one memory unit.
Claim 1 further recites “wherein the computing unit is configured, before each printing operation, to check the CAD file for compliance with standard printing conditions, associated with the at least one dental device, for the 3D filament printing apparatus.” Jang column 13 lines 57-59 disclose “Optional software pack ages 160 may be utilized to check and repair .STL files which are known to often have gaps, defects, etc.” Jang column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .STL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.” Checking and repairing the STL file for use in solid freeform fabrication corresponds with checking CAD files for compliance with standard printing conditions.
Claim 2 further recites “2. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is configured, before each printing operation, to check the printing instructions for compliance with standard printing conditions, associated with the at least one dental device, for the 3D filament printing apparatus.” Jang column 13 lines 57-59 disclose “Optional software pack ages 160 may be utilized to check and repair .STL files which are known to often have gaps, defects, etc.” Jang column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .STL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.” Checking and repairing the STL file for use in solid freeform fabrication corresponds with checking printing instructions for compliance with standard printing conditions.
Claim 6 further recites “6. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is designed to check the CAD file containing the digital model to be printed of the at least one dental device for data errors.” Jang column 13 lines 57-59 disclose “Optional software pack ages 160 may be utilized to check and repair .STL files which are known to often have gaps, defects, etc.” Jang column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .STL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.” Checking for a defect in the STL file corresponds with checking the CAD file for data errors.
Claim 7 further recites “7. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is designed to check whether the CAD file of the at least one dental device is closed or open.” Jang column 13 lines 57-59 disclose “Optional software pack ages 160 may be utilized to check and repair .STL files which are known to often have gaps, defects, etc.” Jang column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .STL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.” Checking for a gap correspond to checking whether the STL file is closed or open. Closed STL files correspond with files without gaps.
Claim 11 further recites “11. The dental printing system according to Claim 10, characterized in that wherein the operating unit is realized separately from the 3D filament printing apparatus.” Jang column 9 lines 51-67 disclose:
apparatus preferably further comprises a computer-aided design computer 30 and supporting software programs and data files …. The apparatus should preferably also include a machine controller 150 electronically linked to the movement devices 152, filament-driving motors 156, colorant injecting valves 154, and possibly liquid-feeding mechanism
The CAD computer corresponds with the operating unit. The machine controller and attached movement devices, motors, injecting values, and liquid feeds corresponds with the 3D filament printing apparatus separate from the CAD computer.
Claim 15 further recites “15. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the control and/or regulation unit is designed to output printing progress for at least one dental device via the display unit by way of a progress bar.” Jang does not explicitly disclose a display unit; however, in analogous art of 3D printing, Buller paragraph 373 teaches:
The historical and/or operative data may be displayed on a display unit. The display unit (e.g., monitor) may display various parameters of the printing system (as described herein) in real time or in a delayed time. The display unit may display the currently printed 3D object (e.g., in real time), the ordered printed 3D object, the actually printed 3D object or any combination thereof. The display unit may display the printing progress of the printed 3D object, or various aspects thereof. The display unit may display at least one of the total time, time remaining and time expanded on printing the generated 3D object.
The display unit corresponds with a display unit of a control or regulation unit. Displaying the printing progress corresponds with outputting a printing progress. Examiner takes official notice that a progress bar is a well known method of displaying progress information comprising a total time and a time remaining. See MPEP §2144.03.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a display unit into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models so that a user may be accessed and retrieved by an operator or user. See Buller paragraph 373.
Claim 17 further recites “17. A 3D filament printing apparatus of a dental printing system according to claim 1.” Jang column 13 lines 16-27 disclose:
a computer-aided design (CAD) computer 30 and a machine controller 150. As schematically shown in FIG. 4, the CAD computer with its supporting software programs 132,134 operates to create a three-dimensional image 136 of a desired object or model and to convert the image into multiple elevation layer data 142 (a plurality of segments). Specifically, the image 136 of a three-dimensional object is converted into a proper format 138 utilizing commercially available CAD/Solid Modeling software 132,134. A commonly used format is the stereo lithography file (.STL), which has become a defacto industry standard for rapid prototyping.
Jang column 9 lines 51-67 disclose:
apparatus preferably further comprises a computer-aided design computer 30 and supporting software programs and data files …. The apparatus should preferably also include a machine controller 150 electronically linked to the movement devices 152, filament-driving motors 156, colorant injecting valves 154, and possibly liquid-feeding mechanism
The CAD computer corresponds with the operating unit. The machine controller and attached movement devices, motors, injecting values, and liquid feeds corresponds with the 3D filament printing apparatus separate from the CAD computer. The machine controller (150) and attached devices correspond with a 3D filament printing apparatus here.
Claim 18 further recites “18. A method for producing dental devices, in particular dental models, impression trays and/or aligners, in particular by way of a dental printing system according to claim 1.” From the above list of alternatives Examiner is selecting “aligners.”
Jang column 7 lines 38-43 disclose:
a supply (e.g., a filament spool 22) of one primary body-building material 20 in filament form. The filament feeds through an upper inlet aperture 42 of a chamber 40 in a filament feeding device 15. Included in this chamber is a filament feeding channel 59 (shown to accommodate the filament 20)
Filament based printing is a filament printing apparatus.
Jang does not explicitly disclose aligners; however, in analogous art of 3D printing of aligners, Shivapuja title teaches “Direct 3D-printed orthodontic aligners.” An orthodontic aligner is a dental aligner.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang and Shivapuja. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use printing of aligners into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose because “Manufacturing the aligners by 3D-printing or additive manufacturing processes imparts novel geometries to the aligners for applying torque, rotation, and full 3D control forces to the teeth in novel ways.” See Shivapuja column 2 lines 61-65.
Claim 18 further recites “wherein, in at least one conversion step, a CAD file of the dental device is converted into printing instructions by way of a computing unit.” Jang column 13 lines 18-27 disclose:
the CAD computer with its supporting software programs 132,134 operates to create a three-dimensional image 136 of a desired object or model and to convert the image into multiple elevation layer data 142 (a plurality of segments). Specifically, the image 136 of a three-dimensional object is converted into a proper format 138 utilizing commercially available CAD/Solid Modeling software 132,134. A commonly used format is the stereo lithography file (.STL), which has become a defacto industry standard for rapid prototyping.
Converting the CAD model into STL corresponds with converting a CAD file into printing instructions. The CAD computer corresponds with at least one computing unit.
Claim 18 further recites “wherein, in at least one transmission step, the printing instructions are transmitted to a 3D filament printing apparatus and wherein the printing instructions are carried out by way of the 3D filament printing apparatus in a printing step and a desired dental device is printed.” Jang does not explicitly disclose aligners; however, in analogous art of 3D printing of aligners, Shivapuja title teaches “Direct 3D-printed orthodontic aligners.” An orthodontic aligner is a dental aligner.
Shivapuja column 12 lines 4-7 teach “can 3D print these aligners at his office during patient's first visit or can send .stl file to out-side service labs who 3D prints the aligners for orthodontist or dental professional.” Sending the STL file corresponds with transmitting the printing instructions to print the aligner in a printing step of a desired dental device.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang and Shivapuja. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use printing of aligners into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose because “Manufacturing the aligners by 3D-printing or additive manufacturing processes imparts novel geometries to the aligners for applying torque, rotation, and full 3D control forces to the teeth in novel ways.” See Shivapuja column 2 lines 61-65.
Claim 18 further recites “wherein in at least one checking step, the CAD file is checked by way of the computing unit for compliance with standard printing conditions, associated with the at least one dental device, for the 3D filament printing apparatus.” Jang column 13 lines 57-59 disclose “Optional software pack ages 160 may be utilized to check and repair .STL files which are known to often have gaps, defects, etc.” Jang column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .STL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.” Checking and repairing the STL file for use in solid freeform fabrication corresponds with checking CAD files for compliance with standard printing conditions.
Claim 20 further recites “20. The method according to Claim 18, wherein the printing instructions are checked for compatibility with the 3D filament printing apparatus and/or for errors in a further checking step by way of the computing unit.” From the above list of alternatives Examiner is selecting “for errors.”
Jang column 13 lines 57-59 disclose “Optional software pack ages 160 may be utilized to check and repair .STL files which are known to often have gaps, defects, etc.” Jang column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .STL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.” Checking and repairing the STL file for defects corresponds with checking printing instructions for errors.
Dependent Claims 3, 10, and 19
Claims 3, 10, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claims 1 and 18 above, and further in view of US 2015/0362913 A1 Liu, et al. [herein “Liu”].
Claim 3 further recites “3. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein respectively one printing parameter package, in particular in the form of defined values for different printing parameters, is stored on the memory unit for the printing of each individual dental device, wherein the computing unit is configured to use a printing parameter package depending on a printing job.” Jang column 13 lines 64-65 and column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “Several software packages specifically written for rapid prototyping …. These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .SIL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.”
But Jang does not explicitly disclose storing printing parameters in the memory of each individual dental device; however, in analogous art of configuring 3D printing, Liu paragraph 39 teaches:
A 3D model document unit includes a model data unit and a printing parameter information unit. The model data unit includes the model data information corresponding to the 3D printed object. The printing parameter information unit includes the printing parameter information corresponding to the 3D printed object.
The 3D model document including the printing parameter information corresponds with the memory unit of the individual dental device.
Liu paragraph 12 teaches:
The printing parameter information is specific printing parameter information with respect to a feature of the 3D printed object. The step of adopting the corresponding printing parameter information and performing a process for printing the 3D printed object according to the model data information of the 3D printed object …. The process for printing the 3D printed object is performed according to the model data information of the 3D printed object.
Printing the 3D printed object according to the specific printing parameter information corresponds with using the printing parameter package of the particular print job of the dental object.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Liu. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use specific printing parameter information into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of “improving the 3D printing quality of the 3D printed object.” See Liu ¶ 9.
Claim 10 further recites “10. The dental printing system according to claim 1, comprising an operating unit for operating the computing unit, wherein the computing unit is designed to load the printing parameter package for printing at least one desired dental device based on a user input.” Jang does not explicitly disclose storing printing parameters in the memory of each individual dental device; however, in analogous art of configuring 3D printing, Liu paragraph 54 teaches:
the 3D printing procedure imports the 3D model document "cube.stl", and reads in a section of <Parameter> in the printing parameter information. The 3D printing procedure analyzes and obtains the printing parameter <Everywhere>, and replaces a configured default printing parameter <Exterior Only> with the printing parameter <Everywhere>.
Importing the document model to replace default printing parameters corresponds to loading the printing parameter package for printing. Replacing the universal printing parameter information with specific printing parameter information corresponds to the user inputting the specific printing parameter information.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Liu. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use specific printing parameter information into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of “improving the 3D printing quality of the 3D printed object.” See Liu ¶ 9.
Claim 19 further recites “19. The method according to Claim 18, wherein in at least one selection step, a printing parameter package designed for the printing of the dental device, in particular in the form of defined values for different printing parameters, is selected and applied by the computing unit depending on a printing job.” Jang does not explicitly disclose storing printing parameters in the memory of each individual dental device; however, in analogous art of configuring 3D printing, Liu paragraph 54 teaches:
the 3D printing procedure imports the 3D model document "cube.stl", and reads in a section of <Parameter> in the printing parameter information. The 3D printing procedure analyzes and obtains the printing parameter <Everywhere>, and replaces a configured default printing parameter <Exterior Only> with the printing parameter <Everywhere>.
Importing the document model to replace default printing parameters corresponds to loading and applying the specific printing parameter package for printing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Liu. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use specific printing parameter information into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of “improving the 3D printing quality of the 3D printed object.” See Liu ¶ 9.
Dependent Claims 4 and 16
Claims 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US patent 9,912,915 B2 Sinclair [herein “Sinclair”].
Claim 4 further recites “4. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is designed, in the event of a recognized discrepancy between at least one parameter of the CAD file of at least one dental device and the standard printing conditions for the at least one dental device, to correct and/or to supplement the CAD file and/or to output a correction suggestion to an operator.” Jang column 13 lines 57-59 disclose “Optional software pack ages 160 may be utilized to check and repair .STL files which are known to often have gaps, defects, etc.” Jang column 14 lines 3-5 disclose “These packages are capable of accepting, checking, repairing, displaying, and slicing .STL files for use in a solid freeform fabrication system.” Checking and repairing the STL file for use in solid freeform fabrication corresponds with checking CAD files for compliance with standard printing conditions.
Jang does not explicitly disclose a correction to the CAD file; however, in analogous art of controlling an additive manufacturing process, Sinclair column 21 lines 23-31 teaches “Based on the detected, determined and/or recognized build errors, the software may create geometric offsets throughout the virtual or digital model or image and/or may create a revised or corrected virtual or digital model or image of the component 2.” Detecting or determining a build error corresponds with recognizing a discrepancy between the CAD file and the printing conditions for the dental device. Revising or correcting the digital model corresponds to correcting or supplementing the CAD file to output a correction.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Sinclair. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use corrected digital models into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose to “account for any detected, determined and/or recognized build errors when the AM device builds one or more subsequent components.” See Sinclair column 21 lines 23-31.
Claim 16 further recites “16. The dental printing system according to claim 1, comprising an operator terminal device that comprises the computing unit.” Jang column 13 lines 18-27 disclose:
the CAD computer with its supporting software programs 132,134 operates to create a three-dimensional image 136 of a desired object or model and to convert the image into multiple elevation layer data 142 (a plurality of segments). Specifically, the image 136 of a three-dimensional object is converted into a proper format 138 utilizing commercially available CAD/Solid Modeling software 132,134. A commonly used format is the stereo lithography file (.STL), which has become a defacto industry standard for rapid prototyping.
The CAD computer corresponds with the computing unit.
But Jang does not explicitly disclose an operator terminal; however, in analogous art of controlling an additive manufacturing process, Sinclair column 6 line 63 teaches “computer terminal 18 (hereinafter ‘terminal 18’).” The computer terminal is at least one operator terminal. See further Sinclair column 9 lines 55 et seq.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Sinclair. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a computer terminal into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of executing respective CAD and AM software. See e.g. Sinclair column 9 lines 24-25 and column 7 lines 38-40.
Dependent Claims 5 and 14
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US patent 12,128,620 B2 Shnell, et al. [herein “Shnell”].
Claim 5 further recites “5. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is designed, in the event of a recognized discrepancy between at least one parameter of the CAD file and/or the printing instructions of at least one dental device and the standard printing conditions for the at least one dental device, to initiate a color change of the display unit.” Jang does not explicitly disclose a color change of the display unit; however, in analogous art of 3D printing systems, Shnell column 14 lines 1-7 teach:
A final score 400 is displayed and color coded to categories of usage (e.g., green for completely passing specifications, yellow for close to threshold and should be determined by operator, red for does not meet specifications laid out in the technical data package). Report 90 is preferably formatted as an infographic or dashboard display.
Not meeting specifications as laid out in the technical data package corresponds with recognizing a discrepancy between at least one parameter of the CAD file or printing instructions and the printing conditions. Displaying a color coded infographic or dashboard corresponds to initiating a respective color change of the display unit.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Shnell. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a color coded display into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of providing a scorecard report of logged variations for a printed object. See Shnell column 13 line 62 to column 14 line 7.
Claim 14 further recites “14. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the 3D filament printing apparatus has a sensor unit that has at least one air humidity and/or filament moisture sensor that is connected to the control and/or regulation unit, wherein the at least one control and/or regulation unit is designed to check whether a measured humidity or moisture corresponds to a value of a predefined humidity or moisture.” From the above list of alternatives Examiner is selecting “humidity.”
Buller paragraph 246 teach “The sensor may comprise a temperature sensor, weight sensor, powder level sensor, gas sensor, or humidity sensor.”
But neither Jang nor Buller explicitly disclose checking the measured humidity with a predefined humidity value; however, in analogous art of 3D printing systems, Shnell column 11 lines 6-13 and 45-56 teach:
Sensors 244 include …; humidity;
…
Composite materials and metals require high print temperatures and are extremely sensitive to fluctuations in humidity, pressure, and atmospheric temperature. Climate and atmospheric control are required to ensure parts have good structural integrity. The 3D printing system of the present invention can react to changes in the climate during prints and perform the required print adjustments to ensure strong print quality. In one embodiment, in reaction to sensor data from one or more sensors 244, processor 239 implements smart software such as ML algorithms to optimize the internal atmosphere (temperature, humidity, etc.) of 3D printing system 1.
Shnell column 3 lines 2-5 teach “If a flaw is detected that exceeds acceptable thresholds the system can be set to alert the user(s) in-situ and/or stop printing in order to save time and material.” See further Shnell figure 33 “flaw detection” (320) and threshold (322). The acceptable threshold is a predefined sensor value.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Shnell. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use sensor adapted printing into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of “in order to save time and material. See Shnell column 3 lines 2-5.
Dependent Claim 8
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 12,561,489 B2 Stahl, et al. [herein “Stahl”].
Claim 8 further recites “8. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is designed to check whether an alignment of the model to be printed of at least one dental device corresponds to an alignment stored in the standard conditions for the at least one dental device.” Jang does not explicitly disclose an alignment of a model to be printed; however, in analogous art of additive manufacturing of dental components, Stahl column 1 lines 57-59 teach “For dental components such as dental restorations, drilling templates, dental models, and the like.”
Stahl column 5 line 62 to column 6 line 1 teaches:
In a determining step, the orientation of the 3D model (1) is determined relative to the building direction based on the evaluation function R with the assigned weighing factors f. In FIG. 1 the hemisphere i.e., the 3D model (1) is oriented in the optimized direction for which R is maximum. The 3D model (1) can be generated by an additive manufacturing apparatus
Determining the orientation of the 3D model according to a maximum of the evaluation function value corresponds with checking an alignment of the model to be printed according to an alignment criteria stored for standard conditions of the device to be printed.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Stahl. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use orientation evaluation function into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of “support structures can be avoided or reduced in sensitive surface segments of the 3D model.” See Stahl column 2 line 61 to column 3 line 1.
Dependent Claim 9
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US patent 10,046,522 B2 Lynch August, et al. [herein “Lynch”].
Claim 9 further recites “9. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is designed, in the event of a recognized discrepancy between the alignment of the model of at least one dental device and the standard printing conditions for the at least one dental device, to adapt the alignment of the model to the standard printing conditions.” Jang does not explicitly disclose an alignment of a model to be printed; however, in analogous art of additive manufacturing with digital models, Lynch column 13 lines 14-20 teaches:
computer may then compare the build scores (secondary criteria) for Orientations 2 and 5 to see which orientation is likely to provide a better surface quality. In this case, Orientation 5 has a significantly better build score compared to Orientation 2. The computer may then identify Orientation 5 as the preferred part orientation, and orient the digital model accordingly.
Orienting the digital model after comparing the different orientations corresponds to adapting the alignment of the model according to the preferred part orientation.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Lynch. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use orienting the digital model into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose “to provide a better surface quality.” See Lynch column 13 lines 14-20.
Dependent Claim 12
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2015/0362913 A1 Liu, et al. [herein “Liu”] and US 2024/0246296 A1 Feng, et al. [herein “Feng”].
Claim 12 further recites “12. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the computing unit is designed to load the printing parameter package for printing at least one desired dental device.” Jang does not explicitly disclose storing printing parameters in the memory of each individual dental device; however, in analogous art of configuring 3D printing, Liu paragraph 54 teaches:
the 3D printing procedure imports the 3D model document "cube.stl", and reads in a section of <Parameter> in the printing parameter information. The 3D printing procedure analyzes and obtains the printing parameter <Everywhere>, and replaces a configured default printing parameter <Exterior Only> with the printing parameter <Everywhere>.
Importing the document model to replace default printing parameters corresponds to loading the printing parameter package for printing. Replacing the universal printing parameter information with specific printing parameter information corresponds to the user inputting the specific printing parameter information.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Liu. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use specific printing parameter information into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of “improving the 3D printing quality of the 3D printed object.” See Liu ¶ 9.
Claim 12 further recites “based on an, in particular graphical and/or visualized, selection mask in accordance with the at least one desired dental device in a digital model to be printed of the at least one dental device.” Jang does not explicitly disclose a selection of a desired dental device to be printed; however, in analogous art of 3D printing digital operations, Feng paragraph 70 teaches “the three-dimensional application type may also be selected or defined by the user.” Selecting the 3D application type corresponds with a selection mask of a digital model to be printed of the desired dental device.
Feng paragraph 63 teaches:
Specifically, the dental application types include a temporary crown, a die dental model, an orthodontic model, a guide, a temporary crown and bridge, a baseplate, a tray, an occlusal splint, a gum glue, a wax crown, a study model, a denture, a transparent baseplate, a trial denture, a wax bracket, a fixed prosthesis, a removable prosthetic dental model, an indirect bonding guide, and an implant model.
The respective selected dental application type corresponds with a selection of a desired dental device.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, Liu, and Feng. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation for user selection of a desired dental application type into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose “to improve the efficiency of an entire diagnosis and treatment process, reduce labor costs, and increase the user experience, it is necessary to shorten data processing time and production and processing time of a dental model.” See Feng ¶4.
Dependent Claim 13
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2006/0111807 A1 Gothait, et al. [herein “Gothait”].
Claim 13 further recites “13. The dental printing system according to claim 1, wherein the control and/or regulation unit is designed to check whether a printing head required according to the printing parameter package, in particular a nozzle of the printing head, for the model to be printed of at least one dental device corresponds to the printing head that is used.” Jang does not explicitly disclose checking nozzles; however, in analogous art of 3D printing, Gothait paragraph 83 teaches:
a blocked nozzle 52 or a "missing" nozzle 52 may be located on printing head 8, as indicated by blank or missing measuring block. In some embodiments, a signal or a message may be provided to a user, for example, to indicate and/or identify one or more malfunctioning nozzles 52 or printing heads 8.
Locating a missing nozzle corresponds with checking whether a printing head required for the model to be printed is a being used.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Gothait. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use detecting missing nozzles into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose so that a user “may manually perform, or instruct to perform, various treatment operations, replacement operations, compensating operations, correcting operations, properties modification operations, and/or suitable adjustment operations.” See Gothait ¶83.
Dependent Claim 21
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang, Shivapuja, and Buller as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of US 2017/0050388 A1 Minardi, et al. [herein “Minardi”].
Claim 21 further recites “21. The method according to claim 18, comprising a cleaning step, in which the filament is cleaned before a printing operation by way of the 3D filament printing apparatus.” Jang does not explicitly disclose cleaning a filament; however, in analogous art of control of 3D printing, Minardi paragraph 92 teaches:
FIG. 9 illustrates cleaning the extruder 502. For example, the extruder 502 may be moved to the first cleaning station 824 to clean a tip of the extruder 502, e.g., to remove a clump 832 of the filament 810 that is coupled to a tip of the extruder 502. During cleaning, the first cleaning station 824 may be used to scrape the extruder tip to remove the clump 832.
Cleaning the tip of the extruder of the clump of filament corresponds with the filament being cleaned before at least one printing operation.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jang, Shivapuja, Buller, and Minardi. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found motivation to use a cleaning step into the system of freeform fabrication of CAD models for the advantageous purpose of “to improve print quality.” See Minardi ¶¶27 & 32.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20060111807 A1 Gothait; Hanan et al.
teaches
Calibration in three-dimensional model printing
US 9895845 B2 Bheda; Hemant et al.
To optimize printing parameters in additive manufacturing process; Bheda column 3 lines 42-45 teach “The system 200 may comprise a computing device (202) for inputting a user's requirements of a three dimensional (3D) object and further optimizing the printing parameters of the printing process.”
US 11084205 B2 Carlson; Andrew James et al.
Operation of printing nozzles in additive manufacture and apparatus for cleaning printing nozzles
US 10363705 B1 Marsch; Daniel et al.
Determining a printing anomaly related to a 3D printed object
Alexander, P., et al. “Part orientation and build cost determination in layered manufacturing” Computer-Aided Design, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 343-356 (1998)
Part orientation build cost optimization.
Lin, L., et al. “3D Printing and Digital Processing Techniques in Dentistry: A Review of Literature” Advanced Engineering Materials, no. 1801013 (2019)
Technology background of 3D printing in dentistry. CAD/CAM manufacturing.
Schweiger, J., et al. “3D Printing in Digital Prosthetic Dentistry: An Overview of Recent Developments in Additive Manufacturing” J. Clinical Medicine (2010)
Technology background of additive manufacturing workflows at dental laboratories.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jay B Hann whose telephone number is (571)272-3330. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-7pm EDT.
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, Renee Chavez can be reached at (571) 270-1104. 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.
/Jay Hann/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186 26 August 2026
Prosecution Insights