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
This Office Action has been issued in response to amendment filed 04/27/2026. Applicant's arguments have been carefully and fully considered but they are not persuasive. Accordingly, this action has been made FINAL.
Claim Status
Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 9, and 16-18 have been amended. Claims 21-22 have been added. Claims 5 and 7 were canceled. Claims 1-4, 6, and 8-22 remain pending and are ready for examination.
Rejections not based on Prior Art
In view of Applicant’s amendments, the previous claim interpretation has been withdrawn.
Rejections based on Prior Art
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached).
Regarding Claim 1, Watanabe teaches an information processing system comprising:
an information processing device configured to control one or more three-dimensional shaping devices configured to shape a three-dimensional shaped object (see Abstract; Watanabe: “a modeling device for producing a three-dimensional object by laminating a modeling material based on three-dimensional shape data of a three-dimensional model on a plate provided detachably from a modeling device main body.”), the information processing device configured to execute:
first acquisition in which first shaping plate identification information for identifying a first shaping plate is acquired (see Abstract; Watanabe: “Unique identification information associated with the information including the three-dimensional shape data is added to the reading means for reading the identification information on the plate,”), the first shaping plate having an upper surface on which the three-dimensional shaped object is to be shaped (see page 6, paragraph 3; Watanabe: “The plate 20 is a substrate (modeling table) having a layered surface 20 a that holds the modeled object 2 that is produced by stacking the material layers 1, and is detachably held on the stage 30.”) and being attachable to a stage of a first three-dimensional shaping device among the one or more three-dimensional shaping devices; (see page 3, second paragraph; Watanabe: “the stacking of the modeling material is performed on a plate detachably provided on the modeling apparatus main body.”)
second acquisition in which first three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying the first three-dimensional shaping device is acquired; (see page 2, paragraph 5; Watanabe: “Unique identification information associated with information including the three-dimensional shape data is added to the plate, Reading means for reading the identification information on the plate;” See page 7, paragraph 5: “When the confirmation of the modeling preparation is completed in S507, the modeling apparatus 100 requests data from each ordered terminal 203 (S508)”)
third acquisition in which first-underlayer-related information related to a first underlayer to be shaped on the upper surface of the first shaping plate is acquired; and (see page 2, paragraph 5; Watanabe: “Control means for stacking a modeling material on the plate based on the three-dimensional shape data associated with the identification information on the plate read by the reading means;”)
a storage device that stores the first shaping plate identification information, the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information, and the first-underlayer-related information in association with one another. (see page 6, first paragraph; Watanabe: “The modeling apparatus 100 according to the present embodiment includes a system control unit 101 (see FIG. 2) as a control unit configured by a CPU (processor), a ROM, a RAM, a user interface unit, a communication unit, and the like. In the system control unit 101, the CPU controls the operation of the modeling apparatus 100 by executing a program stored in a ROM or the like.” See page 5, last paragraph: “FIG. 1 is an external perspective view showing a modeling apparatus 100 of the present embodiment. In the figure, there is shown a modeling chamber 50 that houses the modeling unit 10, the plate 20, the stage 30, the camera unit 40, and a code writing unit (not shown). Further, a modeling chamber door 51, an operation display unit 60, a cartridge housing unit 70, and a work chamber 80 are shown.”)
Regarding Claim 9, Watanabe teaches a storage device provided in an information processing system including an information processing device configured to control one or more three-dimensional shaping devices configured to shape a three-dimensional shaped object (see Abstract; Watanabe: “a modeling device for producing a three-dimensional object by laminating a modeling material based on three-dimensional shape data of a three-dimensional model on a plate provided detachably from a modeling device main body.”), wherein
the storage device stores first shaping plate identification information for identifying a first shaping plate and first-underlayer-related information in associated with each other (see Abstract; Watanabe: “Unique identification information associated with the information including the three-dimensional shape data is added to the reading means for reading the identification information on the plate,”), the first shaping plate having an upper surface on which the three-dimensional shaped object is to be shaped (see page 6, paragraph 3; Watanabe: “The plate 20 is a substrate (modeling table) having a layered surface 20 a that holds the modeled object 2 that is produced by stacking the material layers 1, and is detachably held on the stage 30.”) and being attachable to a stage of a first three-dimensional shaping device among the one or more three-dimensional shaping devices, and (see page 3, second paragraph; Watanabe: “the stacking of the modeling material is performed on a plate detachably provided on the modeling apparatus main body.”)
the first-underlayer-related information being related to a first underlayer to be shaped on the upper surface of the first shaping plate (see page 6, paragraph 3; Watanabe: “The plate 20 is a substrate (modeling table) having a layered surface 20 a that holds the modeled object 2 that is produced by stacking the material layers 1, and is detachably held on the stage 30.”), and the first-underlayer-related information includes three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the first underlayer among the one or more three-dimensional shaping devices. (see page 3, second paragraph; Watanabe: “the stacking of the modeling material is performed on a plate detachably provided on the modeling apparatus main body.”)
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Kobayashi (JP-2017217792-A -hereinafter Kobayashi -Note: As the machine translation attached).
Regarding Claim 16, Kobayashi teaches a three-dimensional shaping device, comprising:
a stage; (see Fig. 5; Kobayashi: “stage 4”)
a discharge head configured to discharge a shaping material on a shaping plate attached to the stage; (see page 5, paragraph 2; Kobayashi: “an apparatus that discharges liquid, such as an ink jet recording apparatus that forms a modeled object by discharging liquid toward the mounting surface by a liquid discharge head (modeling unit) disposed at a position facing the mounting surface of the mounting table.”)
an imaging device configured to detect shaping plate identification information of the shaping plate when the shaping plate is attached to the stage; (see page 15, paragraph 3; Kobayashi: “A modeling use distance detection unit that detects a modeling usage distance L with respect to the modeling reference unit of the model and a modeling usage distance L detected by the modeling usage distance detection unit to model a modeled object on the placement surface by the modeling unit.”)
a conveyance device configured to move the stage (see page 6, second paragraph; Kobayashi: “The stage 4 can move in the vertical direction of the apparatus (Z-axis direction) by the driving force of the Z-axis drive mechanism 23.”) and the discharge head relative to each other; and (see page 6, first paragraph; Kobayashi: “Both ends of the X-axis drive mechanism 21 are respectively in the longitudinal direction (Y of the Y-axis drive mechanism 22 with respect to the Y-axis drive mechanism 22 extending in the apparatus front-rear direction (front-rear direction in FIGS. 2 and 3 = Y-axis direction).”)
an information processing device configured to control the three-dimensional shaping devices, wherein (see Fig. 1: “control unit 100.”)
the shaping plate identification information is information for identifying the shaping plate, and (see page 9, second paragraph; Kobayashi: “Three-dimensional shape data of a three-dimensional structure to be modeled by the three-dimensional modeling apparatus 1 of the present embodiment is input from an external device such as a personal computer connected to the three-dimensional modeling apparatus 1 so as to be able to perform data communication.”)
the information processing device acquires, from a storage device that stores the shaping plate identification information and underlayer-related information related to an underlayer to be shaped on an upper surface of the shaping plate in association with each other (see page 9, second paragraph; Kobayashi: “The control unit 100 generates data (slice data for modeling) of a large number of layered structures decomposed in the vertical direction based on the input three-dimensional shape data. Each slice data corresponds to each layered structure formed by the filaments ejected from the injection nozzle 11 of the modeling head 10 of the three-dimensional modeling apparatus 1, and the thickness of the layered structure is determined by the three-dimensional modeling apparatus.”), the underlayer-related information associated with the shaping plate identification information detected by the imaging device (see page 9, third paragraph; Kobayashi: “In the modeling execution process, first, the control unit 100 creates a lowermost layered structure on the stage 4 according to the slice data of the lowermost layer (first layer) (S6).”), and determines whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle of the discharge head and a height of the stage, based on the acquired underlayer-related information and the shaping plate identification information. (see page 9, third paragraph; Kobayashi: “Specifically, the control unit 100 controls the X-axis drive mechanism 21 and the Y-axis drive mechanism 22 based on the slice data of the lowermost layer (first layer) to target the tip of the injection nozzle 11 of the modeling head 10. The filament is ejected from the ejection nozzle 11 while sequentially moving to a position (target position on the XY plane). Thereby, on the stage 4, the layered structure according to the slice data of the lowest layer (1st layer) is modeled.” See page 9, third paragraph: “When the calibration process is finished and each temperature reaches the target temperature (Yes in S5), the control unit 100 proceeds to the modeling execution process.”)
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 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, 10, and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached) in view of Tang et al. (US 20210103268 A1 -hereinafter Tang).
Regarding Claim 2, Watanabe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, Watanabe does not explicitly teach wherein the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer number-of-use information indicating the number of uses of the first underlayer, and the information processing device determines whether the number of uses of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined first threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition.
Tang from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer number-of-use information indicating the number of uses of the first underlayer (see [0048]; Tang: “the processor may be configured to select the number of layers (NL) below the new (current) layer (Lc), to be retained for the simulation of the deposit of the current layer.”), and the information processing device determines whether the number of uses of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined first threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition. (see [0052]; Tang: “the processor may be configured to compute a representative value of the gradient f(∇T), such as the L2 norm over the layer and may compute the number of layers NL with f(∇T) larger than a chosen threshold below the current printing point (on layer Lc), to be retained in the next simulations.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe to include Tang’s features of the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer number-of-use information indicating the number of uses of the first underlayer, and the information processing device determines whether the number of uses of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined first threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition. Doing so would identify and select which set of tool paths produces optimal thermal, structural, and/or stress characteristics. (Tang, [0059])
Claim 10 contains similar limitations to those in claims 2 are rejected using the same rationale.
Claim 12 contains similar limitations to those in claims 5 are rejected using the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Watanabe and Tang teaches all the limitations of claim 12 above, Watanabe further teaches wherein the first underlayer thermal history information includes any one of or both of underlayer heating time information indicating a heating time in which the first underlayer is heated and underlayer heating temperature information indicating a heating temperature at which the first underlayer is heated. (see page 6, paragraph 3; Watanabe: “The heating member 6 is arranged on the inner peripheral side of the intermediate transfer body 4, is movable in the Z direction (height direction), and is temperature-controlled to heat and melt the material layer 1 on the intermediate transfer body 4. It is. The heating member 6 has a heating surface (pressure surface) 6 a that can contact the inner peripheral surface of the intermediate transfer body 4 at the stacking position 8.”)
Claim(s) 3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached) in view of Yamamoto (US20200269514 -hereinafter Yamamoto).
Regarding Claim 3, Watanabe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, Watanabe does not explicitly teach wherein the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer elapsed time information indicating an elapsed time from shaping of the first underlayer, and the information processing device determines whether the elapsed time from shaping of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined second threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition.
Yamamoto from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer elapsed time information indicating an elapsed time from shaping of the first underlayer (see [0080]; Yamamoto: “the FF correction data generating unit 361 may determine whether the shape error has converged on the basis of the number of times that the same correction algorithm is continuously applied.”), and the information processing device determines whether the elapsed time from shaping of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined second threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition. (see [0080]; Yamamoto: “the FF correction data generating unit 361 may determine that the shape error has converged if the number of times that the same correction algorithm is applied exceeds a threshold.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe to include Yamamoto’s features of the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer elapsed time information indicating an elapsed time from shaping of the first underlayer, and the information processing device determines whether the elapsed time from shaping of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined second threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition. Doing so would improve accuracy of the shaping layer. (Yamamoto, [0045])
Claim 11 contains similar limitations to those in claims 3 are rejected using the same rationale.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached) in view of Roychowdhury et al. (US20190232428A1 -hereinafter Roychowdhury).
Regarding Claim 4, Watanabe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, Watanabe does not explicitly teach wherein the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer thermal history information indicating a thermal history of the first underlayer, the first underlayer thermal history information includes first thermal history integrated value information indicating an integrated value of the thermal history of the first underlayer, and the information processing device determines whether the integrated value of the thermal history of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined third threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition.
Roychowdhury from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer thermal history information indicating a thermal history of the first underlayer, the first underlayer thermal history information includes first thermal history integrated value information indicating an integrated value of the thermal history of the first underlayer (see [0042]; Roychowdhury: “controlling the cooling rate of melt pool 22 includes maintaining the temperature of melt pool 22 at a constant temperature for a predetermined length of time, varying the thermal history of melt pool 22 along a predefined curve”), and the information processing device determines whether the integrated value of the thermal history of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined third threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition. (see [0042]; Roychowdhury: “maintaining the temperature of melt pool 22 above a predetermined temperature for a predetermined length of time.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe to include Roychowdhury’s features of the first-underlayer-related information includes first underlayer thermal history information indicating a thermal history of the first underlayer, the first underlayer thermal history information includes first thermal history integrated value information indicating an integrated value of the thermal history of the first underlayer, and the information processing device determines whether the integrated value of the thermal history of the first underlayer exceeds a predetermined third threshold, based on the first-underlayer-related information acquired in the third acquisition. Doing so would avoid cracking of the component and improve component quality. (Roychowdhury, [0002])
Claim(s) 6, 14, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached) in view of Kobayashi (JP-2017217792-A -hereinafter Kobayashi -Note: As the machine translation attached).
Regarding Claim 6, Watanabe teaches an information processing system comprising:
an information processing device configured to control one or more three-dimensional shaping devices configured to shape a three-dimensional shaped object, the information processing device configured to execute: (see Abstract; Watanabe: “a modeling device for producing a three-dimensional object by laminating a modeling material based on three-dimensional shape data of a three-dimensional model on a plate provided detachably from a modeling device main body.”)
first acquisition in which first shaping plate identification information for identifying a first shaping plate is acquired (see Abstract; Watanabe: “Unique identification information associated with the information including the three-dimensional shape data is added to the reading means for reading the identification information on the plate,”), the first shaping plate having an upper surface on which the three-dimensional shaped object is to be shaped (see page 6, paragraph 3; Watanabe: “The plate 20 is a substrate (modeling table) having a layered surface 20 a that holds the modeled object 2 that is produced by stacking the material layers 1, and is detachably held on the stage 30.”) and being attachable to a stage of a first three-dimensional shaping device among the one or more three-dimensional shaping devices; and (see page 3, second paragraph; Watanabe: “the stacking of the modeling material is performed on a plate detachably provided on the modeling apparatus main body.”)
second acquisition in which first three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying the first three-dimensional shaping device is acquired; and (see page 2, paragraph 5; Watanabe: “Unique identification information associated with information including the three-dimensional shape data is added to the plate, Reading means for reading the identification information on the plate;” See page 7, paragraph 5: “When the confirmation of the modeling preparation is completed in S507, the modeling apparatus 100 requests data from each ordered terminal 203 (S508)”)
a storage device that stores the first shaping plate identification information and first-underlayer-related information related to a first underlayer to be shaped on the upper surface of the first shaping plate in association with each other (see page 6, first paragraph; Watanabe: “The modeling apparatus 100 according to the present embodiment includes a system control unit 101 (see FIG. 2) as a control unit configured by a CPU (processor), a ROM, a RAM, a user interface unit, a communication unit, and the like. In the system control unit 101, the CPU controls the operation of the modeling apparatus 100 by executing a program stored in a ROM or the like.” See page 7, paragraph 5: “each layer is laminated on the plate 20 having the plate ID 21 associated with the modeling job based on the slice data for each layer received from the orderer terminal 203 related to the request.”), wherein
the information processing device acquired, from the storage device, the first-underlayer-related information associated with the first shaping plate identification information acquired in the first acquisition (see page 2, paragraph 5; Watanabe: “Control means for stacking a modeling material on the plate based on the three-dimensional shape data associated with the identification information on the plate read by the reading means;”),
However, Watanabe does not explicitly teach: and determines whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which the first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of the stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device, based on the acquired first-underlayer-related information and the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information acquired in the second acquisition.
Kobayashi from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches determines whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which the first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of the stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device, based on the acquired first-underlayer-related information and the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information acquired in the second acquisition. (see page 11, paragraph 6; Kobayashi: “an inter-sensor calibration process between the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32 may be performed before the calibration process. In the inter-sensor calibration process, for example, the stage sensor 31 on the modeling head 10 is moved to a position facing the nozzle sensor 32, and the distance L4 between the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32 is determined by both the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32.” See page 8, paragraph 5: “the calibration process of the position of the stage 4 in the Z-axis direction, that is, the process of detecting the modeling use distance L, which is a reference for the amount of stage movement by the Z-axis drive mechanism 23, is performed by modeling with a filament.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe to include Kobayashi’s features of determining whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which the first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of the stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device, based on the acquired first-underlayer-related information and the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information acquired by the second acquisition unit. Doing so would reduce a processing error due to the orientation of the placement surface deviating from the target. (Kobayashi, page 15, second paragraph)
Regarding Claim 14, Watanabe teaches all the limitations of claim 9 above; however, Watanabe does not teach: wherein the first-underlayer-related information and first-nozzle-related information related to a nozzle of the first three-dimensional shaping device are stored in association with each other, and the first-nozzle-related information includes nozzle identification information for identifying a nozzle attached to the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the first underlayer.
Kobayashi further teaches wherein the first-underlayer-related information and first-nozzle-related information related to a nozzle of the first three-dimensional shaping device are stored in association with each other (see page 2, last paragraph; Kobayashi: “A mounting surface distance detection unit such as a stage sensor 31 that detects the distance L1 to the surface, and a reference such as a nozzle sensor 32 and a movable sensor 33 that acquire the distance L2 between the mounting surface distance detection unit and the modeling reference unit.”), and the first-nozzle-related information includes nozzle identification information for identifying a nozzle attached to the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the first underlayer. (see page 5, paragraph 6; Kobayashi: “the filament supplied by the filament supply unit 6 is heated and melted by the head heating unit 12, and the molten filament is ejected by being pushed out from a predetermined injection nozzle 11 to form a layer on the stage 4. The three-dimensional structure is formed by sequentially stacking the three-dimensional structure.”)
The same motivation to combine Watanabe and Kobayashi a set forth for Claim 6 equally applies to Claim 14.
Regarding Claim 20, Watanabe teaches an information processing system comprising:
one or more information processing devices configured to control one or more three-dimensional shaping devices configured to shape a three-dimensional shaped object (see Abstract; Watanabe: “a modeling device for producing a three-dimensional object by laminating a modeling material based on three-dimensional shape data of a three-dimensional model on a plate provided detachably from a modeling device main body.”), wherein
the information processing system determines, according to a use history of a first shaping plate… the first shaping plate having an upper surface on which the three-dimensional shaped object is to be shaped (see page 6, paragraph 3; Watanabe: “The plate 20 is a substrate (modeling table) having a layered surface 20 a that holds the modeled object 2 that is produced by stacking the material layers 1, and is detachably held on the stage 30.”) and being attachable to the stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device among the one or more three-dimensional shaping devices. (see page 3, second paragraph; Watanabe: “the stacking of the modeling material is performed on a plate detachably provided on the modeling apparatus main body.”)
However, Watanabe does not explicitly teach: whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which a first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of a stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device,
Kobayashi from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which a first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of a stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device, (see page 11, paragraph 6; Kobayashi: “an inter-sensor calibration process between the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32 may be performed before the calibration process. In the inter-sensor calibration process, for example, the stage sensor 31 on the modeling head 10 is moved to a position facing the nozzle sensor 32, and the distance L4 between the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32 is determined by both the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32.” See page 8, paragraph 5: “the calibration process of the position of the stage 4 in the Z-axis direction, that is, the process of detecting the modeling use distance L, which is a reference for the amount of stage movement by the Z-axis drive mechanism 23, is performed by modeling with a filament.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe to include Kobayashi’s features of whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which a first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of a stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device. Doing so would reduce a processing error due to the orientation of the placement surface deviating from the target. (Kobayashi, page 15, second paragraph)
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Watanabe and Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, Watanabe does not explicitly teach: wherein the information processing device determines whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which the first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of the stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device, based on the acquired first shaping plate identification information and the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information acquired in the second acquisition.
Kobayashi from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the information processing device determines whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which the first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of the stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device, based on the acquired first shaping plate identification information and the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information acquired in the second acquisition. (see page 11, paragraph 6; Kobayashi: “an inter-sensor calibration process between the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32 may be performed before the calibration process. In the inter-sensor calibration process, for example, the stage sensor 31 on the modeling head 10 is moved to a position facing the nozzle sensor 32, and the distance L4 between the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32 is determined by both the stage sensor 31 and the nozzle sensor 32.” See page 8, paragraph 5: “the calibration process of the position of the stage 4 in the Z-axis direction, that is, the process of detecting the modeling use distance L, which is a reference for the amount of stage movement by the Z-axis drive mechanism 23, is performed by modeling with a filament.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe to include Kobayashi’s features of the information processing device determines whether to perform a calibration for each of a height of a nozzle from which the first three-dimensional shaping device discharges a shaping material and a height of the stage of the first three-dimensional shaping device, based on the acquired first shaping plate identification information and the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information acquired in the second acquisition. Doing so would reduce a processing error due to the orientation of the placement surface deviating from the target. (Kobayashi, page 15, second paragraph)
Claim 22 contains similar limitations to those in claims 21 are rejected using the same rationale.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached) in view of Kobayashi (JP-2017217792-A -hereinafter Kobayashi -Note: As the machine translation attached) in view of Buller (US20170304894A1 -hereinafter Buller).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Watanabe and Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 6 above; however, Watanabe does not explicitly teach: wherein the first shaping plate identification information acquired in the first acquisition is information detected from any one of a two-dimensional code, a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag, and an integrated circuit (IC) tag.
Buller from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the first shaping plate identification information acquired in the first acquisition is information detected from any one of a two-dimensional code, a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag (see [0066]; Buller: “The devices may include sensor, actuator, antenna (e.g., radio frequency identification (RFID))”), and an integrated circuit (IC) tag.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe and Kobayashi to include Buller’s features of the first shaping plate identification information acquired in the first acquisition is information detected from any one of a two-dimensional code, a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag. Doing so would reduce time consuming, meticulous, and/or costly manufacturing processes. (Buller, [0006])
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached) in view of Kobayashi (JP-2017217792-A -hereinafter Kobayashi -Note: As the machine translation attached) in view of Poursillie et al. (US20250345986A1 -hereinafter Poursillie).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Watanabe and Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 14 above; however, Watanabe does not explicitly teach: wherein the first-nozzle-related information includes information indicating a replacement history of the nozzle attached to the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the first underlayer.
Poursillie from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the first-nozzle-related information includes information indicating a replacement history of the nozzle attached to the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the first underlayer. (see [0101]; Poursillie: “With two separate deposition nozzles, the changeover time is several seconds (usually between 3 and 5), resulting in a dead time of between 3.3 h and 5.5 h to change the deposition nozzle for each layer.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Watanabe and Kobayashi to include Poursillie’s features of the first-nozzle-related information includes information indicating a replacement history of the nozzle attached to the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the first underlayer. Doing so would manufacture highly complex parts, inaccessible to standard manufacturing methods such as material removal (machining, cutting, etc.) or forming (molding, bending, thermoforming, etc.), at no extra cost. (Poursillie, [0002])
Claim(s) 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JP-2017217792-A -hereinafter Kobayashi -Note: As the machine translation attached) in view of Watanabe et al. (JP-2018171778-A -hereinafter Watanabe -As the machine translation attached).
Regarding Claim 17, Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 16 above; however, Kobayashi does not explicitly teach: wherein the underlayer-related information includes three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying a three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the underlayer indicated by the underlayer-related information, and the information processing device determines whether to perform the calibration, based on three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying an own three-dimensional shaping device and three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the underlayer indicated by the underlayer-related information.
Watanabe from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein
the underlayer-related information includes three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying a three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the underlayer indicated by the underlayer-related information, and (see Abstract; Watanabe: “Unique identification information associated with the information including the three-dimensional shape data is added to the reading means for reading the identification information on the plate,”)
the information processing device determines whether to perform the calibration, based on three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying an own three-dimensional shaping device and three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the underlayer indicated by the underlayer-related information. (see page 2, paragraph 3; Watanabe: “It is characterized in that a marker serving as a reference for alignment is arranged in a two-dimensional distribution on the surface of a cover glass and / or a glass substrate, and a micro stereolithography focus point is positioned based on that position.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Kobayashi to include Watanabe’s features of the underlayer-related information includes three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying a three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the underlayer indicated by the underlayer-related information, and the information processing device determines whether to perform the calibration, based on three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying an own three-dimensional shaping device and three-dimensional shaping device identification information for identifying the three-dimensional shaping device that has shaped the underlayer indicated by the underlayer-related information. Doing so would prevent a modeled object from being produced on a plate that does not meet the conditions such as the size and causing a modeling defect. (Watanabe, page 7, paragraph 6)
Regarding Claim 18, Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 16 above; however, Kobayashi does not explicitly teach further comprising: a storage unit, wherein the information processing device causes the storage unit or the storage device to store the shaping plate identification information and calibration history information indicating a history of calibration in association with each other.
Watanabe from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches further comprising: a storage unit, wherein the information processing device causes the storage unit or the storage device to store the shaping plate identification information and calibration history information indicating a history of calibration in association with each other. (see page 6, first paragraph; Watanabe: “The modeling apparatus 100 according to the present embodiment includes a system control unit 101 (see FIG. 2) as a control unit configured by a CPU (processor), a ROM, a RAM, a user interface unit, a communication unit, and the like. In the system control unit 101, the CPU controls the operation of the modeling apparatus 100 by executing a program stored in a ROM or the like.” See page 5, last paragraph: “FIG. 1 is an external perspective view showing a modeling apparatus 100 of the present embodiment. In the figure, there is shown a modeling chamber 50 that houses the modeling unit 10, the plate 20, the stage 30, the camera unit 40, and a code writing unit (not shown). Further, a modeling chamber door 51, an operation display unit 60, a cartridge housing unit 70, and a work chamber 80 are shown.”)
The same motivation to combine Kobayashi and Watanabe a set forth for Claim 17 equally applies to Claim 18.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JP-2017217792-A -hereinafter Kobayashi -Note: As the machine translation attached) in view of Buller (US20170304894A1 -hereinafter Buller).
Regarding Claim 19, Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 16 above; however, Kobayashi does not explicitly teach: wherein the shaping plate identification information of the shaping plate is information of any one of information encoded as a two-dimensional code, information stored in a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag, or information stored in an integrated circuit (IC) tag.
Buller from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the shaping plate identification information of the shaping plate is information of any one of information encoded as a two-dimensional code, information stored in a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag (see [0066]; Buller: “The devices may include sensor, actuator, antenna (e.g., radio frequency identification (RFID))”), or information stored in an integrated circuit (IC) tag.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Kobayashi to include Buller’s features of the shaping plate identification information of the shaping plate is information of any one of information encoded as a two-dimensional code, information stored in a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag, or information stored in an integrated circuit (IC) tag. Doing so would reduce time consuming, meticulous, and/or costly manufacturing processes. (Buller, [0006])
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to applicant’s argument of pages 10-11 which recites:
“The unique identification information, as disclosed by Watanabe, is referred to as "plate ID". (See 1 [0014] of Watanabe.) As best understood by Applicant, the unique identification information of Watanabe could correspond to, at best, the first shaping identification information of independent claim 1. However, the unique identification information of Watanabe does not seem to correspond to the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information of independent claim 1. Further, Watanabe fails to disclose any other information corresponding to the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information of independent claim 1.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The unique identification information of Watanabe reads on ‘the first shaping plate identification information’ while the data from each ordered terminal reads on ‘the first three-dimensional shaping device identification information’. Watanabe (page 3, paragraph 5) discloses: “The order data includes three-dimensional shape data indicating the three-dimensional shape of the modeling object, a plate locking code, a desired delivery date, and other communication items.” And Watanabe (page 7, first paragraph) discloses: “The order data naturally has a data ID for identifying from other order data.” That is, the data ID of the ordered terminal 203 still reads on the limitation.
With respect to applicant’s argument of page 12 which recites:
“Nowhere does Kobayashi, however, disclose the calibration is determined "based on the acquired underlayer-related information and the shaping plate identification information," as recited in independent claim 16.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kobayashi (page 9, first paragraph) discloses “during this pre-heat treatment, a calibration process is performed in which the modeling use distance L that is a reference for the amount of stage movement by the Z-axis drive mechanism 23 is detected to calibrate the Z-axis direction position of the stage 4 (S10)” while Kobayashi (page 8, last paragraph) discloses “This setting may be performed in response to an operation instruction input by the user, or by reading the type of filament material from an information storage medium such as an IC chip or a barcode provided on a reel or the like around which the filament material is wound.”
Moreover, Kobayashi (page 9, paragraph 2) discloses: “Each slice data corresponds to each layered structure formed by the filaments ejected from the injection nozzle 11 of the modeling head 10 of the three-dimensional modeling apparatus 1, and the thickness of the layered structure is determined by the three-dimensional modeling apparatus.” That is, the calibration is determined based on filament material information such as an IC chip or a barcode and the thickness of the layered structure. Therefore, Kobayashi still reads the limitation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cao (US11059218B1) discloses including a calibration method which may accurately measure the height difference between the nozzle and the bottom of the probe when the probe is triggered.
Pieger (US12235619B2) discloses calibrating the processing machine by correcting the positioning of the laser beam and/or the position of the construction platform using the determined deviations.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 VI N TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1108. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, ROBERT FENNEMA can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/V.N.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/Christopher E. Everett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights