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
In view of the amendment filed 03/09/2026:
Claims 1-20 are pending.
The objection of claims 1, 9, 11-14, and 20 is withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection of claims 3 and 5 is withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claims 1-20 is maintained.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection of claims 1 and 4 as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,611,092 (herein referred to as Reference Application) in view of Buller et al. (US20180186067) is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Buller et al. (US20180186067).
Regarding claim 1, Buller teaches a device ([0122] energy flux travels through an optical
system 114 (e.g., comprising an aperture, lens, mirror, or deflector) and an optical window 132,
to heat a target surface 131, [0216] The scanner can be included in an optical system that is
configured to direct energy from the energy source to a predetermined position on the target
surface (e.g., exposed surface of the material bed), [0219] The detection system may be a part
of the optical system, [0279] In some embodiments, an optical system may comprise a (e.g.,
structured) light projection apparatus (e.g., FIG. 29, 2920)) for three-dimensional printing, the
device comprising:
at least one optical image generator (optical system 2920 in Figure 29 and [0026] a
radiation source configured to generate a structured radiation for projection onto the exposed
surface to form a detectable image) configured to project an optical image on a target surface
utilized for the three-dimensional printing ([0278] a portion in the field of view (e.g., FIG. 29,
2950) may be viewed at a first angle (e.g., FIG. 29, 2975) from the optical system (e.g., FIG. 29,
2920) and [0279] an optical system may comprise a (e.g., structured) light projection apparatus
(e.g., FIG. 29, 2920). The light projection apparatus may be configured to project (e.g.,
structured) light over a field of view of a surface, for example, a (e.g., portion and/or entirety of
a) target surface (e.g., FIG. 29, 2915)), the optical image comprising optical variations that are detectable ([0279] The structured light apparatus can project any suitable pattern onto a
surface for detection by the detector. The structured light may form a projection on a target
surface. The structured light may be devoid of a pattern. The structured light may comprise a
map or an image. The structured light may comprise a known and/or predetermined projection.
Examples of patterns are alternating light and dark shapes (e.g., stripes and/or fringes), a (e.g.,
pixelated) grid, a (e.g., solid line) grid, and/or a (e.g., plurality of) spiral(s). The pattern may
(e.g., controllably) evolve (e.g., change) over time. The change may comprise a change in an
orientation and/or scale of at least part of the pattern. The pattern may be static, or moving
(e.g., dynamic), for example, during at least part of projection time on the target surface. The
pattern may be projected (on the target surface) during at least part of the 3D printing), the at
least one optical image generator being disposed adjacent to the target surface (see light
projection apparatus 2920 disposed adjacent to target surface 2915 in Figure 29);
at least one detector (at least one detector 2910; Figure 29) configured to optically
detect (A) the optical variations appearing on the target surface ([0279] detection system may
comprise at least one detector (e.g., FIG. 29, 2910) configured to receive illumination (e.g.,
reflected, scattered, and/or a combination thereof) from the projected radiation, and to
generate one or more signals therefrom (e.g., corresponding to an image)) and (B) a difference
between the optical variations detected and corresponding optical variations projected
([0030] causes at least a portion of the exposed surface to deviate from the average planarity
and/or the average optical characteristic; (c) projecting a detectable image on the exposed
surface; and (d) detecting any deviation within the detectable image from the average planarity
and/or from the average optical characteristic, which deviation is indicative of (i) a composition of at least a portion of the three-dimensional object, (ii) a position of at least a portion of the
three-dimensional object relative to a platform supporting the material bed, (iii) a shape of at
least a portion of the three-dimensional object, (iv) an average planarity of the exposed surface,
or (v) any combination of (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) and [0291] the structured light detection system
may detect a deviation from requested planarity of the exposed surface prior to processing of
the energy beam, and/or after a recoating operation (and optionally: facilitate directing a
second planarization operation to correct the defective deviation),
the difference corresponding to a physical variation in uniformity of the target surface
([0280] and [0291] the structured light detection system may detect a deviation from requested
planarity of the exposed surface prior to processing of the energy beam, and/or after a
recoating operation (and optionally: facilitate directing a second planarization operation to
correct the defective deviation)),
the at least one detector operatively coupled with the at least one optical image
generator ([0279] a detection system that is operationally coupled to a 3D printing system (e.g.,
included as part of a 3D printer) comprises an apparatus configured to project structured
electromagnetic radiation… an optical system may comprise a (e.g., structured) light projection
apparatus (e.g., FIG. 29, 2920)… The (e.g., structured light) detection system may comprise at
least one detector (e.g., FIG. 29, 2910) configured to receive illumination (e.g., reflected,
scattered, and/or a combination thereof) from the projected radiation, and to generate one or
more signals therefrom (e.g., corresponding to an image)),
the at least one detector being disposed adjacent to the target surface (see at least one
detector 2910 disposed adjacent to target surface 2915 in Figure 29); and
at least one array of translatable optical assemblies ([0122] FIG. 9 shows an example of a 3D printing system 900 where an energy flux 919 (e.g., second energy beam) is emitted from energy source 922, and a scanning energy beam 901 (e.g., first energy beam) is emitted from energy source 921. Both energy beams can travel through their respective optical mechanisms (e.g., 914, 920) and through the same optical window (e.g., 932) and [0216] The energy beam(s) and/or source(s) can be moved via a scanner. The scanner may comprise a galvanometer scanner, a polygon, a mechanical-stage (e.g., X-Y-stage), a piezoelectric device, gimble, or any combination of thereof. The galvanometer may comprise a mirror. The scanner may comprise a modulator. The scanner may comprise a polygonal mirror. The scanner can be the same scanner for two or more energy sources and/or beams. At least two (e.g., each) energy source and/or beam may have a separate scanner. The energy sources can be translated independently of each other. In some cases, at least two energy sources and/or beams can be translated at different rates, and/or along different paths), the at least one array of
optical assemblies comprising two or more optical assemblies ([0122] FIG. 9 shows an example of a 3D printing system 900 where an energy flux 919 (e.g., second energy beam) is emitted from energy source 922, and a scanning energy beam 901 (e.g., first energy beam) is emitted from energy source 921. Both energy beams can travel through their respective optical mechanisms (e.g., 914, 920) and through the same optical window (e.g., 932)), wherein each optical assembly corresponds to at least a portion of the target surface (see scanning energy beam 901 and emitted radiated energy 908 corresponding to target surface that forms hardened material 906 in material bed 904 in Figure 9).
While Buller teaches the device comprises one or more motors that may comprise
actuators ([0305]) and energy beam from the energy sources can translate via a translation
mechanism with respect to the target surface during the three-dimensional printing ([0213]),
Buller fails to explicitly teach the translation mechanism being operatively coupled to,
supportive of, and configured to translate: (A) the at least one optical image generator and/or
(B) the at least one detector.
However, Buller teaches translating an energy beam facilitates a representative
roughness sampling by assessing plurality of portions of the target surface ([0047] the at least
one controller is programmed to direct the translation of the energy beam at a rate that is
operable to facilitate representative roughness sampling by the reflected radiation. In some
embodiments, the at least one controller is programmed to direct the translation of the energy
beam at a rate that is operable to enable the detector to sample a plurality of portions from the
footprint, via the reflected radiation) and translating the target surface relative to the energy
beam allows for a desired exposure from the beam ([0230] Large may include covering a
maximum number of positions on the target surface. Large may include covering all the
positions on the target surface. Each position on the target surface may receive exposure from
each of the scanners. At times, the target surface may be translated to achieve a desired
exposure from each of the scanners).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the translation mechanism of
Buller be operatively coupled to, supportive of, and configured to translate: (A) the at least one
optical image generator and/or (B) the at least one detector, to achieve the predictable result of translating the target surface relative to the device. One of ordinary skill would be motivated
to translate the optical image generator and/or (B) the at least one detector to obtain a more
representative roughness sampling over multiple areas of the target surface. There would have
been a reasonable expectation of success for the translating mechanism to be configured to
translate the at least one optical image generator and/or the at least one detector, since Buller
teaches the apparatuses disclosed may comprise one or more motors and that the motors may
comprise actuators ([0305]). Therefore, the device may comprise an actuator that would make
it capable of translating the at least one optimal image generator and/or the at least one
detector.
Regarding claim 2, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Further, Buller teaches
wherein the device is utilized at least in part to generate a topographical image of the target
surface ([0280]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 2. Further, Buller teaches
wherein the device is utilized at least in part to generate the topographical image of the target
surface ([0280]) in real time during the three-dimensional printing ([0279] The pattern may be
projected (on the target surface) during at least part of the 3D printing. For example, the
pattern may be projected during processing of the energy beam. For example, the pattern may
be projected during formation of a planar surface adjacent to the platform).
Regarding claim 4, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Further, Buller teaches
wherein the uniformity of the target surface comprises uniformity in planarity of the target
surface ([0280] The target surface (e.g., comprising the pre-transformed material, transformed
material, build platform, or enclosure floor) may comprise at least one detectable property. The detectable property may be a physically detectable property (e.g., protrusions, indentations,
roughness, smoothness, regularity, or planarity)…. The transformed material may be, or
become, a hard material. For example, one or more topographical features (e.g., indentations,
protrusions, roughness, smoothness, granular, or planar) may be detected on the at least the
fraction of the target surface).
Regarding claim 5, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Further, Buller teaches
wherein the projected optical variations appearing on the target surface comprise a series of optical variations ([0279] The structured light may comprise a known and/or predetermined projection. Examples of patterns are alternating light and dark shapes (e.g., stripes and/or fringes), a (e.g., pixelated) grid, a (e.g., solid line) grid, and/or a (e.g., plurality of) spiral(s). The pattern may (e.g., controllably) evolve (e.g., change) over time. The change may comprise a change in an orientation and/or scale of at least part of the pattern. The pattern may be static, or moving (e.g., dynamic), for example, during at least part of projection time on the target surface).
Regarding claim 6, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Further, Buller teaches
wherein the device is configured to facilitate alteration of the printing based at least in part on
the difference detected ([0291]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 6. Further, Buller teaches
wherein the device is configured to facilitate alteration of the printing at least in part by being
configured to cause alteration of operations of at least one other mechanism associated with
the three-dimensional printing, the at least one mechanism being different than the translation
mechanism ([0291]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Further, Buller
teachers the translation mechanism linearly translates the energy source and optical elements
laterally and parallel to the target surface ([0216] the energy source may be movable such that
it can translate across (e.g., laterally) the top surface of the material bed and [0223], [0225]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Buller teaches wherein each optical assembly of the array of optical assemblies comprising: (i) at least one optical component configured to direct propagation of an energy beam along a beam path from within the optical assembly to impinge on the target surface disposed above a build platform to print at least one three-dimensional object as part of the three-dimensional printing ([0122] FIG. 9 shows an example of a 3D printing system 900 where an energy flux 919 (e.g., second energy beam) is emitted from energy source 922, and a scanning energy beam 901 (e.g., first energy beam) is emitted from energy source 921. Both energy beams can travel through their respective optical mechanisms (e.g., 914, 920) and through the same optical window (e.g., 932)), the build platform configured to carry at least one three-dimensional object printed by the three-dimensional printing ([0122] The emitted radiated energy (e.g., 908) and first (e.g., scanning) energy beam (e.g., 901) may be utilized to form a hardened material (e.g., 906) in a material bed (e.g., 904); Figure 9); and
(ii) a housing configured to (a) accommodate the at least one optical component and a portion of the beam path of the energy beam, and (b) allow impingement of the energy beam on the target surface to print the at least one three-dimensional object by the three-dimensional printing ([0216] The optical system may be enclosed in an optical enclosure. An optical enclosure may be any optical enclosure disclosed in patent application number PCT/US17/64474, titled “OPTICS, DETECTORS, AND THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING” that was filed Dec. 4, 2017, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety).
Regarding claim 11, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. While Buller fails to
teach the at least one optical image generator is stationary during translation of the translation mechanism, the optical image generator being of the at least one optical image generator, Buller does teach optical assemblies are stationary during translation of target surface by the translation mechanism ([0214] The energy source(s) can be stationary. The target and/or source surface can translate vertically, horizontally, or in an angle (e.g., planar or compound). Translation of the target and/or surface can be manual, automatic, or a combination thereof), [0216] The scanner may comprise a modulator (e.g., as described herein). The energy source(s) can project energy using a DLP modulator, a one-dimensional scanner, a two-dimensional scanner, or any combination thereof. The energy source(s) can be stationary or translatable. The energy source(s) can translate vertically, horizontally, or in an angle (e.g., planar or compound angle), [0224] The one or more optical elements may be stationary).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the at least one optical image
generator of modified Buller be stationary during translation of the target surface by the
translation mechanism, to achieve the predictable result of having a relative translation
between the target surface and the at least one optical image generator. There would have
been a reasonable expectation of success for the translating mechanism to be configured to
have the at least one optical image generator stationary during translation of the target
surface, since Buller teaches other various optical components are stationary as the target
surface translates, and one of ordinary skill would be motivated to obtain a representative
roughness sampling over multiple areas of the target surface, which can be achieved if there is
a relative translation between the at least one optical image generator and the target surface.
Regarding claim 12, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Further, Buller
teaches wherein the at least one optical image generator translates during translation of the translation mechanism, the optical image generator being of the at least one optical image generator ([0025] a radiation source configured to generate a structured radiation for projection onto the exposed surface to form a detectable image, [0228] The optical element may be movable (e.g., translatable) for maintaining the focus of the detector energy beam. The optical element can move (e.g., according to arrows next to 1385, 1390, 1395) before, during, and/or after processing of the target material. The optical element may alter a focus of the returning energy beam on each detector. At times, the optical element may maintain and/or alter an image size of one or more detected images (e.g., perform chromatic aberration and/or correction). At times, the optical element may synchronize one or more images from the imaging sensor).
Regarding claim 13, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. While Buller fails to
explicitly teach that the at least one detector is stationary during translation of the translation
mechanism, Buller does teach a detector for characterizing a thermal lensing characteristic of
an optical element that can be stationary or mobile ([0348] The detector may have a field of
view such that only one irradiated position is measured at a given time. A focal plane of the
detector may coincide with a surface (e.g., a top surface) of the calibration structure. The
detector may be stationary or mobile (e.g., having a known trajectory)). Further, the rejection
of claim 11 establishes that it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the at least one optical
image generator be stationary during translation of the target surface by the translation
mechanism.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the detector of modified Buller be
stationary during translation of the target surface by the translation mechanism to achieve the
predictable result of having a relative translation between the target surface and the detector.
There would have been a reasonable expectation of success for the translating mechanism to
be configured to have the at least one detector stationary during translation of the target
surface, since Buller teaches other various optical components that are operatively coupled to the detector are stationary as the target surface translates, and one of ordinary skill would be
motivated to obtain a representative roughness sampling over multiple areas of the target
surface, which can be achieved if there is a relative translation between the at least one optical
image generator and detector, and the target surface.
Regarding claim 14, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. While Buller fails to
teach wherein the at least one detector translates during translation of the translation mechanism, the detector being of the at least one detector, Buller does teach a detector for characterizing a thermal lensing characteristic of an optical element that can be stationary or mobile ([0348] The detector may have a field of view such that only one irradiated position is measured at a given time. A focal plane of the detector may coincide with a surface (e.g., a top surface) of the calibration structure. The detector may be stationary or mobile (e.g., having a known trajectory)). Further, the rejection of claim 12 establishes that Buller teaches the at least one optical image generator translates during translation of the translation mechanism.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the at least one detector of
modified Buller translate during translation of the translation mechanism to achieve the
predictable result of having a relative translation between the target surface and the detector.
There would have been a reasonable expectation of success for the translating mechanism to
be configured to translate the at least one detector, since Buller teaches other various optical
components that are operatively coupled to the detector are translatable, and one of ordinary
skill would be motivated to obtain a representative roughness sampling over multiple areas of the target surface, which can be achieved if there is a relative translation between the at least
one optical image generator and detector, and the target surface.
Regarding claim 16, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. Further, Buller
teaches the device further comprising an array of optical windows disposed on a ceiling of an
enclosure in which the target surface is disposed (see optical window 115 and optical window
132 disposed in ceiling of enclosure 107 in Figure 1), each optical window being configured to
respectively facilitate traversal of an energy beam therethrough to impinge on the target
surface to print at least one three-dimensional object, the energy beam being of energy beams
([0132]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 16. While Buller teaches
the device is configured to allow unobstructed operation of the energy beams each traversing
through an optical window of the array of optical windows (see energy beams 101 and 108 in
Figure 1), Buller fails explicitly to teach wherein the device is configured to allow unobstructed
operation of the at least one detector and of the at least one optical image generators.
However, Buller teaches operation of calibration structure 3002 as shown in Figure 30A
that is laterally moveable and retracted from area above the target surface such that
unobstructed operation of the calibration structure occurs ([0248] a stage 3008 on which a
calibration structure 3002 is mounted. The stage 3008 is laterally movable (e.g., in the direction
of 3017). When the 3D printing is in process, the stage 3008 is retracted from an area above the
platform 3009 (e.g., towards an area to the side of the platform, e.g., 3012)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the device be configured laterally move and be retractable, as is shown for the calibration structure, since one of ordinary skill
would be motivated to have an unobstructed operation of the at least one detector and of the
at least one optical image generators. Further, retracting the device when it is not in use allows
for unobstructed operation of the energy beams traversing through an optical window of the
array of optical windows.
Regarding claim 18, modified Buller teaches a method of three-dimensional printing,
the method comprising:
providing the device of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); and
using the device as part of the three-dimensional printing ([0281] In some embodiments, a structured light detection system is used to monitor and/or calibrate one or
more processes (e.g., in a 3D printing system)).
Regarding claim 19, modified Buller teaches an apparatus for three-dimensional printing
(3D printing system 100; Figure 1), the apparatus comprising at least one controller ([0364] The
system and/or apparatus can comprise a controlling mechanism (e.g., a controller)) configured
to couple to a power source ([0383] The system and/or apparatus described herein (e.g.,
controller) and/or any of their components may comprise an adapter (e.g., AC and/or DC power
adapter). The system and/or apparatus described herein (e.g., controller) and/or any of their
components may comprise a power connector. The power connector can be an electrical power
connector. The power connector may comprise a magnetically coupled (e.g., attached) power
connector. The power connector can be a dock connector. The connector can be a data and
power connector), the at least one controller being configured to (i) operatively coupled with
the device of claim 1 ([0364] The methods, systems, and/or apparatuses disclosed herein may incorporate a controller mechanism that controls one or more of the components described
herein and [0279] The pattern may (e.g., controllably) evolve (e.g., change) over time; see
rejection of claim 1 above); and
control, or direct control of, one or more operations associated with the device ([0364]
The methods, systems, and/or apparatuses disclosed herein may incorporate a controller
mechanism that controls one or more of the components described herein).
Regarding claim 20, modified Buller teaches a non-transitory computer readable
program instructions for three-dimensional printing, the program instructions, when read by
one or more processors operatively coupled with the device of claim 1 (see rejection
of claim 1 above; [0278] The systematic variation may be pre-calculated and/or calibrated. The
pre-calculated systematic variation may be considered when performing measurement of one
or more optical properties (e.g., XY offset of the energy beam relative to the target surface, or
velocity of the energy beam)), cause the one or more processors to execute, or direct execution
of, one or more operations associated with the device ([0368] The processing unit can execute
a sequence of machine-readable instructions, which can be embodied in a program or software.
The instructions may be stored in a memory location, such as the memory 702. The instructions
can be directed to the processing unit, which can subsequently program or otherwise configure
the processing unit to implement methods of the present disclosure), the printing instructions
being inscribed on one or more media ([0371] Methods as described herein can be
implemented by way of machine (e.g., computer processor) executable code stored on an
electronic storage location of the computer system, such as, for example, on the memory 702
or electronic storage unit 704).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller et al.
(US20180186067), and further in view of Kojima et al. (WO2014007399- Machine translation
provided herein).
Regarding claim 10, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 9. However, Buller fails
to teach wherein the optical assembly is reversibly retractable from the device and reversibly
insertable into the device.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to optical systems for forming additively
manufactured parts, Kojima teaches an optical assembly that is reversibly retractable from the
device and reversibly insertable into the device (“As the distance adjusting means, means for
advancing and retracting a part or all of the light irradiation means arranged in the housing in
the housing according to the size, shape, structure, etc. of the optical three-dimensional object
accommodated in the housing [ Hereinafter, this may be referred to as “advance / retreat
means (β1)”], and means for moving the optical three-dimensional object accommodated in
the housing forward and backward relative to the light irradiation means”- see pg. 8 paragraph
8).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to have the optical assembly be reversibly retractable
from the device and reversibly insertable into the device, since it would be desirable to obtain
access to the optical assembly (whether it is for cleaning, repairing the apparatus, etc…). If it
were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the optical assembly then it would be obvious to make the optical assembly removable for that purpose and insertable such that
operation of the optical assembly can proceed (see MPEP 2144.04 V.C.).
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller et al.
(US20180186067), and further in view of Buller et al. (WO2020072986- herein referred to as
Buller2).
Regarding claim 15, modified Buller teaches the device of claim 1. However, Buller fails
to teach wherein the translation mechanism is configured to translate for a first period of time
comprising variable acceleration and for a second period time comprising variable deceleration.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to additive manufacturing, Buller2 teaches a
translation mechanism is configured to translate for a first period of time comprising variable
acceleration and for a second period time comprising variable deceleration ([0117] A motion
command may comprise a requested velocity and/or acceleration for (e.g., a given portion of)
the path. In some embodiments, the at least one controller may modify (e.g., translate) forming
instructions from a first representation to a second representation and [0123] Coordinated
motion may include modifying (e.g., splitting) at least two coordinated motion plans into
segments. A segment may comprise wherein a same type of motion is commanded (e.g., for a
given segment) for all coordinated axes. A type of motion may comprise (i) an acceleration…
during the period 520 the y-axis is undergoing (e.g., positive) acceleration, while the x-axis is
undergoing (e.g., negative) acceleration. In the example of Fig. 5, during the period 530 the y-
axis is undergoing constant (e.g., positive) velocity motion (e.g., no acceleration), and the x-axis
is undergoing constant (e.g., negative) velocity motion (e.g., no acceleration). In the example of Fig. 5, during the period 540 the y-axis is undergoing (e.g., negative) acceleration, while the x-
axis is undergoing (e.g., positive) acceleration)). Varying the translation mechanism acceleration
allows for coordinated motion that avoids the formation of defects in a printed part ([0006]
Lack of coordination between some control variables may promote manifestation of at least
one defect in the formed 3D object. For example, lack of coordination between two or more
control variables may form a 3D object that deviates from at least one requested geometry
parameter and/or material property).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to have the translation mechanism of modified Buller be
configured to translate for a first period of time comprising variable acceleration and for a
second period time comprising variable deceleration, as taught by Buller2, for the benefit of
achieving a coordinated motion that avoids the formation of defects in a printed part.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, Applicant argues that Buller describes a detecting characterizing based on the physical model alone, and that the reference does not describe detecting variations between a physical build and projected build (see pg. 8 of Remarks), such that Buller fails to teach detecting a “difference between the optical variations detected and corresponding optical variations projected” (see bolded limitation in pg. 9 of Remarks). Buller describes the projection may be a map, image, or predetermined projection ([0279] The structured light apparatus can project any suitable pattern onto a surface for detection by the detector. The structured light may form a projection on a target surface. The structured light may be devoid of a pattern. The structured light may comprise a map or an image. The structured light may comprise a known and/or predetermined projection) such that the detecting is not necessarily characterized by the physical model alone. Further, the limitations “projecting an optical image on a target surface… the optical image comprising optical variations that are detectable” and a “difference between the optical variations detected and corresponding optical variations projected” broadly recite an optical image with optical variations, and do not explicitly require the projected image to be a projected build.
Further, regarding Applicant’s argument that Buller does not describe, teach, or suggest the use or suggest the use of arrays of translatable optical assemblies for the use in a three-dimensional building process (see pg. 8-9 of Remarks), Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Buller teaches at least one array of translatable optical assemblies ([0122] FIG. 9 shows an example of a 3D printing system 900 where an energy flux 919 (e.g., second energy beam) is emitted from energy source 922, and a scanning energy beam 901 (e.g., first energy beam) is emitted from energy source 921. Both energy beams can travel through their respective optical mechanisms (e.g., 914, 920) and through the same optical window (e.g., 932) and [0216] The energy beam(s) and/or source(s) can be moved via a scanner. The scanner may comprise a galvanometer scanner, a polygon, a mechanical-stage (e.g., X-Y-stage), a piezoelectric device, gimble, or any combination of thereof. The galvanometer may comprise a mirror. The scanner may comprise a modulator. The scanner may comprise a polygonal mirror. The scanner can be the same scanner for two or more energy sources and/or beams. At least two (e.g., each) energy source and/or beam may have a separate scanner. The energy sources can be translated independently of each other. In some cases, at least two energy sources and/or beams can be translated at different rates, and/or along different paths), the at least one array of optical assemblies comprising two or more optical assemblies ([0122] FIG. 9 shows an example of a 3D printing system 900 where an energy flux 919 (e.g., second energy beam) is emitted from energy source 922, and a scanning energy beam 901 (e.g., first energy beam) is emitted from energy source 921. Both energy beams can travel through their respective optical mechanisms (e.g., 914, 920) and through the same optical window (e.g., 932)), wherein each optical assembly corresponds to at least a portion of the target surface (see scanning energy beam 901 and emitted radiated energy 908 corresponding to target surface that forms hardened material 906 in material bed 904 in Figure 9).
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 ARIELLA MACHNESS whose telephone number is (408)918-7587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30-2:30 PT.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/ARIELLA MACHNESS/Examiner, Art Unit 1743