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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The Applicant has elected Invention II (claims 27-34) for the further prosecution as filed in the response dated 04/23/2026 with traverse. The travers is based that the apparatus claims and the method claims are not directed to independent and distinct inventions but rather are directed to the same single inventive concept and therefore should be examined together. In response, 1) as shown in the “Requirement for Restriction/Election” dated 3/27/2026, the feature of “an apparatus for producing an object by additive manufacturing layer by layer” is known in the art. Fockele (US-PG-pub 2013/0332507 A1) discloses “an apparatus for producing an object by additive manufacturing layer by layer” (Figs., Abstract, examples, and claims of US-PG-pub 2013/0332507 A1); 2) Inventions II and I are related as process and apparatus for its practice. The inventions are distinct if it can be shown that either: (1) the process as claimed can be practiced by another and materially different apparatus or by hand, or (2) the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process. (MPEP § 806.05(e)). In this case the powder layer can be practiced by another and materially deposition with vacuum or by hand, for the layer deposition process. Therefore, the restriction is still proper. Claims 16-26 have been withdrawn as non-elected claims, Claims 27-34 remain for examination, wherein claim 27 is an independent claim.
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) 27-28 and 32-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Fockeie (US-PG-pub 2014/0332507, listed in IDS filed on 1/5/2024, updated as US 9713856 B2, thereafter PG’507).
Regarding claim 27, PG’507 teaches a method for producing a molded body by building up layers of powdered material, comprising the steps of: a) preparing a layer of powdered material, b) heating the layer using controlled radiation by laser irradiating selected points of the layer and the powdered material is solidified by melting to form connecting regions, c) preparing a next layer of powdered material on the layer irradiated most recently and d) heating the most recently prepared layer using controlled radiation by radiating selective points of the layer (Abstract, Figs., examples, and claims of PG’507), which reads on the method including receiving powder, configuring powder position, electromagnetic radiation, solidifying, radiation beam moving, and controlling the solidifying unit and deflection unit from first section to second section as claimed in the instant claim. PG’507 specify that: “the building process of the molded body the change of respective thermal conductivity properties influences the local uptake of energy into the respective volume elements for remelting the powder” (par.[0018] of PG’507) and more specify indicates that: “the thermal conductivity of the powdered material often differs considerably from the thermal conductivity of the material of the already formed region of the molded body” (par.[0010] of PG’507), which reads on the limitation of thermal resistance of the second section greater than the thermal resistance of the first section as claimed in the instant claim. Since PG’507 teaches all of the essential process steps as claimed in the instant claim, claim27 is anticipated by PG’507.
Regarding claim 28, PG’507 provides examples to perform irradiation and solidification from section 1 to section 2. (Figs.3-6, par.[0017] and [0051]-[0054] of PG’507), which reads on the claimed controlling the deflection device to perform solidifying from the first section to the second section as claimed in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 32, PG’507 specify that: “According to the present invention the rebuilding process is controlled by the control apparatus 28 such that the application of energy to selective points per unit of time to a respective irradiation point on a relevant layer is selected as a function of the thermal conductivity of a defined immediate surrounding region of the irradiation point and controlled by adjusting relevant irradiation parameters by means of the control apparatus 28.” (par.[0045] of PG’507), which reads on the claimed energy density adjusting as claimed in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 33, PG’507 indicates the gas flowing in the process chamber and which has been considered in the thermal conductivity to adjust relevant irradiation parameters (Fig.1 and par.[0042]-[0045] of PG’507).
Regarding claim 34, PG’507 specify determining the thermal conductivity of the surrounding region of a respective irradiation point and adjusting the energy application per unit of time (par.[0021]-[0023] of PG’507).
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) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PG’507
Regarding claim 30, PG’507 indicates that the method according to the invention enables complete control of all of the essential building parameters, such as the laser power, the laser scanning speed etc. in each individual volume element of the molded body being formed during the building phase. (par.[0016] of PG’507). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to apply the well-known technique, that is control the speed in different section scanning in the process of PG’507 in order to control the energy input in different section with different thermal conductivity.
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PG’507 in view of Defelice et al (US-PG-pub 2017/0282455 A1, listed in IDS filed on 1/5/2024, thereafter PG’455).
Regarding claim 29, PG’507 indicates that: “the focusing of the laser beam 24 and the scanning speed of the laser beam 24 can be controlled by means of the control apparatus 28. By modulating at least one of these irradiation parameters, preferably a plurality of irradiation parameters, the energy application of the laser beam per unit of time into the respectively irradiated layer of powder at the beam point of impact, i.e. the respective irradiation point, can be changed according to a desired irradiation strategy. The respective energy density of the laser beam 24 at the beam point of impact can thus be varied as a function of the respective irradiation point. According to one embodiment of the present invention the energy density of the laser beam at the irradiation point on a respective layer is modulated as a function of the conductivity of a defined immediate surrounding region of the irradiation point. The lower the thermal conductivity in the surrounding region of an irradiation point, the smaller the application of energy to selective points per unit of time at the irradiation point, so that as far as possible the remelting process can be more even at the most optimum melting temperature..” (par.[0044] of PG’507). PG’507 does not specify scanning distance different in beam scanning as claimed in the instant claim. However adjusting the scanning distance for control the solidifying energy by variation of the distance between the laser beam track is well-known technique as demonstrated by PG’455. PG’455 teaches a method of producing an object from a powder using a laser sintering system (Abstract, Figs. and Examples of PG’455). PG’455 teaches that the heat energy amount is adjusted at least in part by variation of one or more of a laser light intensity, a deflection velocity of the laser beam, and a variation of the distance between the laser beam tracks on the powder layer. (par.[0024] of PG’455). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to apply the well-known technique, that is control the variation of the distance between the laser beam tracks on the powder layer as demonstrated by PG’455 in the process of PG’507 since both PG’507 and PG’455 teach the same powder additive manufacturing process throughout whole disclosing range.
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PG’507 in view of Crosland et al (US-PG-pub 2019/0252152 A1. Thereafter PG’152).
PG’507 indicates that: “the focusing of the laser beam 24 and the scanning speed of the laser beam 24 can be controlled by means of the control apparatus 28. By modulating at least one of these irradiation parameters, preferably a plurality of irradiation parameters, the energy application of the laser beam per unit of time into the respectively irradiated layer of powder at the beam point of impact, i.e. the respective irradiation point, can be changed according to a desired irradiation strategy. The respective energy density of the laser beam 24 at the beam point of impact can thus be varied as a function of the respective irradiation point. According to one embodiment of the present invention the energy density of the laser beam at the irradiation point on a respective layer is modulated as a function of the conductivity of a defined immediate surrounding region of the irradiation point. The lower the thermal conductivity in the surrounding region of an irradiation point, the smaller the application of energy to selective points per unit of time at the irradiation point, so that as far as possible the remelting process can be more even at the most optimum melting temperature..” (par.[0044] of PG’507). PG’507 does not specify scanning angle different in beam scanning as claimed in the instant claim. However adjusting the scanning angle for control the fusing power by variation of the angle and forming direction is well-known technique as demonstrated by PG’152. PG’152 teaches a method of forming a product using additive layer manufacture (Title, abstract and claims of PG’152). PG’152 specify applying different fusing power distribution in different direction and forming angle (Figs.1-2, claim 8 and 20, and par.[0041]-[0043] of PG’152). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to apply the well-known technique, that is control the forming angle and forming direction between the laser beam tracks on the powder layer as demonstrated by PG’152 in the process of PG’507 since both PG’507 and PG’152 teach the same powder additive manufacturing process throughout whole disclosing range.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIE YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1884. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Jonathan J Johnson can be reached on 571-272-1177. 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.
/JIE YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights