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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, Claims 15-31 in the reply filed on 01/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Applicant claims the benefit of US Provisional Application No. 63/429,231 filed 12/01/2022. Claims 15-31 have been afforded the benefit of this filing date.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS dated 02/08/2024, 07/18/2024, 07/18/2024, and 12/08/2025 have been considered and placed in the application file.
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) 15-16, 20, 26-27, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tran et al (US Patent Publication US 2022/0143704 A1 hereafter referred to as Tran).
Regarding Claim 15, Tran teaches a method of detecting weld defects (Tran ¶0002, ¶0014, ¶0056, ¶0059 discloses detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process) in a build surface of an additive manufacturing system (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process), the method comprising:
obtaining an image (Tran ¶0014, ¶0048 disclose obtaining perception data of the workpiece and the perception data being an optical or IR image) of at least a portion (Tran ¶0062, ¶0089, ¶0114 discloses acquiring perception data of a localized region and a region of interest) of the build surface (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process);
subdividing at least a portion (Tran ¶0082, ¶0092 discloses segmenting the first perception data into foreground anomaly features and background features) of the image (Tran ¶0014, ¶0048 disclose obtaining perception data of the workpiece and the perception data being an optical or IR image) corresponding to a location of a part (Tran ¶0009, discloses anomalies being related to the location in the part corresponding to material deposition location) in the build surface into a plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process); and
identifying the presence of weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead) in the build surface (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process) based at least in part on light intensities (Tran ¶0063 discloses the optical sensor in the camera measuring the light on the visible spectrum ¶0089 and ¶0114 discloses intensity pixel values being used to determine regions of interest and Fig 3b shows how the intensity values are used to determine the anomaly) of the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process).
Regarding Claim 16, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, wherein identifying the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead) includes identifying the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead) based at least in part on light intensities gradients (Tran ¶0131 discloses using the gradients to validate anomalies ¶0120 discloses changing the pixels to determine the region of interest for the anomaly) in the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process).
Regarding Claim 20, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, wherein identifying the presence of the weld defects includes (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead) identifying weld defects adjacent (Tran ¶0137, ¶0147, discloses identifying noise splatters and other defects adjacent to the current specimen) to one or more regions of the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process).
Regarding Claim 26, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising moving an optics assembly relative to the build surface (Tran ¶0153 discloses moving the optical monitoring system to be adjusted and follow the fusion of the workpiece).
Regarding Claim 27, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising moving a photosensitive detector (Tran ¶0071 discloses a phot interrupter signaling the sensors) relative to the build surface (Tran ¶0153 discloses moving the optical monitoring system to be adjusted and follow the fusion of the workpiece).
Regarding Claim 31, Tran teaches a part (Tran ¶0004 discloses a PBF part, ¶0007 discloses a part being manufactured)manufactured using the method of claim 15 (See claim 15 above).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 17-19, 21-25, and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Tran et al (US Patent Publication US 2022/0143704 A1 hereafter referred to as Tran) in view of Buller et al. (US Patent Publication 2018/0186067 A1 hereafter referred to as Buller).
Regarding Claim 17, Tran teaches the method of claim 16, wherein identifying the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead) includes identifying the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead) based at least in part on a proportion of the light intensity gradients (Tran ¶0131 discloses using the gradients to validate anomalies ¶0120 discloses changing the pixels to determine the region of interest for the anomaly)
to a local fusion direction (Tran ¶0098, ¶0075 discloses the fusion direction being in the vertical or horizonal direction) in each region of the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process).
Tran does not explicitly disclose that are perpendicular.
Buller is in the same field of image analysis in 3D printing. Further, Buller teaches that are perpendicular (Buller ¶0290 discloses the gradient filter being applied perpendicular).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Tran by incorporating the Gabor filter and applying it perpendicularly as taught by Buller to make an invention that can automatically determine the changes in gradient of the image to be able to detect defects based on the gradient; thus one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since there is a need to include a calibration system that facilitates calibration of one or more elements of an optical system, since an optical system (e.g., comprising a detection system) of the 3D printer may deviate from one or more of its calibrated properties. Calibrating the one or more elements of the optical system may result in (e.g., substantially) accurate operation of the optical system. (Buller, ¶0008).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 18, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, wherein identifying the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead).
Tran does not explicitly disclose includes using a Gabor filter.
Buller is in the same field of image analysis in 3D printing. Further, Buller teaches includes using a Gabor filter (Buller ¶0029, ¶0031, ¶0290 discloses the use of a Gabor filter as an image gradient filter).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Tran by incorporating the Gabor filter and applying it perpendicularly to local fusion directions as taught by Buller to make an invention that can automatically determine the changes in gradient of the image to be able to detect defects based on the gradient; thus one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since there is a need to include a calibration system that facilitates calibration of one or more elements of an optical system, since an optical system (e.g., comprising a detection system) of the 3D printer may deviate from one or more of its calibrated properties. Calibrating the one or more elements of the optical system may result in (e.g., substantially) accurate operation of the optical system. (Buller, ¶0008).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 19, Tran in view of Buller teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the Gabor filter (Buller ¶0029, ¶0031, ¶0290 discloses the use of a Gabor filter as an image gradient filter) applied to each separate region of the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process) is associated with a local (Buller ¶0283 discloses the contrast being related to the locality of the region of pixels) fusion direction (Tran ¶0098, ¶0075 discloses the fusion direction being in the vertical or horizonal direction) of each separate region (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process). See rationale for Claim 18, its parent claim.
Regarding Claim 21, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, wherein identifying the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead)
associated with the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process)
with the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process)
in the plurality of regions (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process).
Tran does not explicitly disclose includes generating a score map, wherein scores associated, are indicative of weld quality.
Buller is in the same field of image analysis in 3D printing. Further, Buller teaches includes generating a score map (Buller ¶0290 discloses a map with pixel values associated with measurements indicating a defect) wherein scores associated (Buller ¶0290 discloses a map with pixel values associated with measurements indicating a defect) are indicative of weld quality (Buller ¶0290 discloses a map with pixel values associated with measurements indicating a defect).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Tran by incorporating the score map and threshold as taught by Buller to make an invention that can automatically determine and map the changes in gradient of the image to be able to detect defects based on the gradient; thus one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since there is a need to include a calibration system that facilitates calibration of one or more elements of an optical system, since an optical system (e.g., comprising a detection system) of the 3D printer may deviate from one or more of its calibrated properties. Calibrating the one or more elements of the optical system may result in (e.g., substantially) accurate operation of the optical system. (Buller, ¶0008).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 22, Tran in view of Buller teaches the method of claim 21, wherein identifying the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead) includes comparing the scores to a threshold (Buller ¶0290 discloses comparing the pixel values to a threshold to include or exclude the data) to identify the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead). See rationale for Claim 21, its parent claim.
Regarding Claim 23, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, of the additive manufacturing system (Tran ¶0057-¶0060 discloses a workpiece or substrate that includes a plurality of layers and the anomalies may be identified in the plurality of layers in the 3D manufacturing process) based at least in part on the identification of the presence of weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead).
Tran does not explicitly disclose further comprising controlling at least one process.
Buller is in the same field of image analysis in 3D printing. Further, Buller teaches further comprising controlling at least one process (Buller ¶0153, ¶0237 discloses controlling the shape and the temperature of the manufacturing process based on measured anomalies).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Tran by incorporating the score map and threshold as taught by Buller to make an invention that can automatically determine and map the changes in gradient of the image to be able to detect defects based on the gradient; thus one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since there is a need to include a calibration system that facilitates calibration of one or more elements of an optical system, since an optical system (e.g., comprising a detection system) of the 3D printer may deviate from one or more of its calibrated properties. Calibrating the one or more elements of the optical system may result in (e.g., substantially) accurate operation of the optical system. (Buller, ¶0008).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 24, Tran in view of Buller teaches the method of claim 23, further comprising selectively stopping a build process for one or more of the at least one parts (Buller ¶0153, ¶0291 discloses halting the energy in the manufacturing process based on measured anomalies) based at least in part on the identification of the presence of weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead). See rationale for Claim 23, its parent claim.
Regarding Claim 25, Tran in view of Buller teaches the method of claim 23, further comprising changing one or more process parameters (Buller ¶0291 discloses change a process parameter of the 3D printing process based on detection of unexpected components) based at least in part on the identification of the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead). See rationale for Claim 23, its parent claim.
Regarding Claim 28, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, related to the identification of the presence of the weld defects (Tran ¶0014 detecting anomalies in-situ of a workpiece in a 3D printing manufacturing process ¶0073 discloses a defect being nonuniformity in the weld bead).
Tran does not explicitly disclose further comprising outputting information, to a user.
Buller is in the same field of image analysis in 3D printing. Further, Buller teaches further comprising outputting information (Buller ¶0382 discloses a computer system with a user interface that provides information to the user regarding the current and historical information of the 3D print process) to a user (Buller ¶0382 discloses a computer system with a user interface that provides information to the user regarding the current and historical information of the 3D print process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Tran by incorporating user interface as taught by Buller to make an invention that can automatically determine the changes in gradient of the image to be able to detect defects based on the gradient and display the results to a user; thus one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since there is a need to include a calibration system that facilitates calibration of one or more elements of an optical system, since an optical system (e.g., comprising a detection system) of the 3D printer may deviate from one or more of its calibrated properties. Calibrating the one or more elements of the optical system may result in (e.g., substantially) accurate operation of the optical system. (Buller, ¶0008).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 29, Tran teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising fusing precursor material on the build surface (Tran ¶0003, ¶0056, ¶0069 discloses fusing material powder on the build platform) to form one or more parts on the build surface (Tran ¶0061 discloses laser beam being used to deposit material on the build surface to the workpiece).
Tran does not explicitly disclose with one or more laser energy pixels.
Buller is in the same field of image analysis in 3D printing. Further, Buller teaches with one or more laser energy pixels (Buller ¶0148 discloses an electron and laser beam being used to form the 3D object).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Tran by incorporating laser energy to deposit material as taught by Buller to make an invention that can automatically determine the changes in gradient of the image to be able to detect defects based on the gradient and adjust the deposition process; thus one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since there is a need to include a calibration system that facilitates calibration of one or more elements of an optical system, since an optical system (e.g., comprising a detection system) of the 3D printer may deviate from one or more of its calibrated properties. Calibrating the one or more elements of the optical system may result in (e.g., substantially) accurate operation of the optical system. (Buller, ¶0008).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 30, Tran teaches of claim 15 (See claim 15 above).
Tran does not explicitly disclose s non-transitory computer readable medium including processor executable instructions that when executed by a processor perform the method.
Buller is in the same field of image analysis in 3D printing. Further, Buller teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium (Buller ¶0029, ¶0028 and ¶0053-¶0056 discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium) including processor executable instructions (Buller ¶0028 discloses instructions read by one or more computer processors) that when executed by a processor perform the method (Buller ¶0028 discloses the processor performing operations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Tran by incorporating the computer readable medium and processor executing instructions as taught by Buller to make an invention that can automatically determine the changes in gradient of the image to be able to detect defects based on the gradient; thus one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since there is a need to include a calibration system that facilitates calibration of one or more elements of an optical system, since an optical system (e.g., comprising a detection system) of the 3D printer may deviate from one or more of its calibrated properties. Calibrating the one or more elements of the optical system may result in (e.g., substantially) accurate operation of the optical system. (Buller, ¶0008).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Reference Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
EP-3521028-A1 to DR PONTILLER-SCHYMURA discloses method and system for additive manufacturing three dimensional objects.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL LYNN ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-6413. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 7:30am- 5:00pm.
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, Oneal Mistry can be reached on (313) 446-4912. 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.
/RACHEL L ROBERTS/Examiner, Art Unit 2674
/ONEAL R MISTRY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2674