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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 7-13 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Groups II and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/11/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-6) in the reply filed on 08/11/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a1 as being anticipated by DeMuth et al. (US 20170144224).
Regarding claim 1, DeMuth et al. discloses “a laser manufacturing system” (fig.1A), comprising
“a laser patterning unit” (fig.1A, 116) having “an optically addressed light valve” ([0058], i.e., This combined beam can be directed at an energy patterning unit that includes either a transmissive or reflective pixel addressable light valve. [0059], i.e., an energy patterning unit 116);
“an image relay” (fig.1A, 120) able to direct “a patterned laser beam from the laser patterning unit” (from energy patterning unit 116) against “a part” (workpiece or powder at around 144 (i.e., material));
wherein “the patterned laser beam” (122) “can ablatively remove material from the part” (claim 8, i.e., The part of claim 6, wherein the manipulation point is a temporary structure projecting from the part that is removable with a directed energy beam).
Regarding claim 3, DeMuth et al. discloses the patterned laser beam can further induce selected chemical reactions in part material. ([0080], i.e., the article processing unit 340 can have a controlled atmosphere. This allows reactive materials to be manufactured in an inert gas, or vacuum environment without the risk of oxidation or chemical reaction, or fire or explosion (if reactive metals are used).
Regarding claim 5, DeMuth et al. discloses “the laser patterning unit provides one-dimensional patterning” (Abstract, i.e., An additive manufacturing system including a two-dimensional energy patterning system. [0070] a patterned image (typically two-dimensional) from the energy patterning unit 116. Examiner noted that two-dimensional energy patterning for tow-dimensional image inherently include one dimensional laser patterning (i.e., laser processing along a single line or a straight line)).
Regarding claim 6, DeMuth et al. discloses “the laser patterning unit provides two-dimensional patterning” ((Abstract, i.e., An additive manufacturing system including a two-dimensional energy patterning system. [0070] a patterned image (typically two-dimensional) from the energy patterning unit 116).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeMuth et al. (US 20170144224) in view of Tsai et al. (US 2018/0229332).
Regarding claim 2, DeMuth et al. discloses “the part has multiple material layers” ([0080] When using a powdered ceramic or metal material in this additive manufacturing system 300, the powder can be spread in a thin layer, approximately 1-3 particles thick, on top of a base substrate (and subsequent layers) as the part is built.)
DeMuth et al. is silent regarding with selected layers being removable.
Tsai et al. teaches “with selected layers being removable” (fig.2 shows the selected layers being removed. [0090], i.e., whereas the removal/cutting laser is applied at a power between about 1 and about 100 watts, such as about 10 watts. [0010], i.e., removing material away from one or more of the n alloy foil sheets to shape said one or more of the n alloy foil sheets to correspond in shape with one or more respective slices of the metal alloy component). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify DeMuth et al. with Tsai et al., by incorporate DeMuth et al.’s cutting method or step to modify Tsai et al.’s object, to allow user or creators to shape the 3D layers into desired shape with high precision structural details.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeMuth et al. (US 20170144224) in view of Sullivan et al. (US 10759084).
Regarding claim 4, DeMuth et al. discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for the patterned laser beam can further laser peen part material.
Sullivan et al. teaches “the patterned laser beam can further laser peen part material” (col.6 at lines 15-28, i.e., New methods produce composites comprised of core-shell and/or multilayer core-shell nanomaterials and micromaterials by means of shock consolidation, with and without nanoparticle additives for improved mechanical and multifunctional properties, using conventional shock consolidation approaches as well as additive manufacturing methods). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify DeMuth et al. with Sullivan et al., by adding Sullivan et al.’s laser penning step to DeMuthe et al.’s layers or object, for improving mechanical and multifunctional properties, using convention shock consolidation (col.6 at lines 15-28) as taught by Sullivan et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights