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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements submitted on 03/01/2024 and 07/09/2024 are being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the limitation, “A processing method for an additively manufactured article”, in the preamble of the claim, but recites, “accommodating an additively manufactured article containing metal”, in the body of the claim. To improve clarity regarding the intended structure being disclosed, the Examiner suggests the recitation in the body of the claim be edited to read, “accommodating the additively manufactured article containing metal”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "wherein the applying includes" in the body of the claim. To remain consistent in claim language, the Examiner suggests this read as, “wherein applying the residual stress includes”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lan et al (CN 114559057 A), herein after referred to as "Lan", in view of Ishigami et al (US 20120252322 A1), herein after referred to as "Ishigami".
Regarding Claim 1, Lan discloses a processing method for an additively manufactured article (Lan: see English Translation, Page 1, lines 12-13, wherein a “method for improving the fatigue performance of additively manufactured metal components” is disclosed), the processing method comprising:
accommodating an additively manufactured article containing metal and a medium made of metal (Lan: see English Translation, Page 1, line 13, “additively manufactured metal components”; see also Page 6, lines 22-23, wherein “the shot material is stainless steel”);
and reducing a roughness of a surface of the additively manufactured article (Lan: see English Translation, Page 7, lines 17-18, wherein “the purpose of the second stage is to significantly reduce surface roughness and achieve a fine polishing effect” is disclosed) and applying a residual stress to the additively manufactured article by stirring the additively manufactured article and the medium (Lan: see English Translation, Page 7, lines 8-11 and 15-17, wherein “the first stage is low-pressure jet accelerated shot circulation polishing” that is intended to “reduce surface roughness and introduce a small amount of residual compressive stress”), wherein a surface of the medium includes a curved surface (Lan: see FIG. 2 in view of the English Translation, Page 14, line 15, wherein element 4, the “shot”, is disclosed).
Lan does not disclose a barrel polishing device.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Ishigami discloses a barrel polishing device (Ishigami: see Paragraph [0005], wherein “a barrel polishing tank” is disclosed).
Ishigami discloses “a polishing media” that is formed “of a sintered body in which a ceramic structure and a metal structure are intermingled with each other” that is to engage with a “material to be polished in a barrel polishing tank” (Ishigami: see Paragraph [0028]). Specifically, the workpiece and the polishing media are stirred such that they collide or rub against each other, “whereby a surface of the work is polished” (Ishigami: see Paragraph [0005]).
Similarly, Lan discloses “a composite device and method for improving the fatigue performance of additively manufactured metal components” (Lan: see English Translation, Page 1, lines 12-13), through utilizing “shot peening and surface polishing” combined in one device (Lan: see English Translation, Page 12, line 19). The disclosed structure can “reduce surface roughness by polishing while shot peening” and introduce “large residual compressive stress” to improve the “fatigue life of additive manufacturing components” (Lan: see English Translation, Page 12, lines 23 and 26-27).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the structure disclosed by Lan with the structure disclosed by Ishigami such that a barrel polishing tank is used to circulate the stainless steel shot medium such that they engage with an additively manufactured metal component to reduce roughness and introduce residual compressive stress. One would be motivated to do this due to the versatility of a barrel polishing tank, wherein “barrel polishing may be a dry process or a wet process” that can accommodate a plurality of additives “as needed”, such as water or organic solvents (Ishigami: see Paragraphs [0116-0117]), whereas the composite device and method relies upon “bullet circulation with a high-pressure chemical abrasive jet” (Lan: see English Translation, Page 1, lines 14-15). Furthermore, barrel polishing may accommodate alternative media shapes, “according to the embodiment of the invention”, and includes cylinders, prisms, cones, pyramids, and spheres (Ishigami: see Paragraph [0069]).
Regarding Claim 2, Lan in view of Ishigami discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Lan further discloses the processing method for an additively manufactured article according to claim 1, wherein the applying includes stirring the additively manufactured article and the medium without using an abrasive grain (see Lan, English Translation, Page 6, lines 22-23, wherein “the shot material is stainless steel”; see also Ishigami, Paragraph [0116], and Paragraph [0112] in view of FIG. 3, wherein the barrel polishing may be a wet process, i.e. additive 50 is water, and the work 40 and polishing media 1 are “vibrated, rotated, or the like” within the barrel polishing tank vessel).
Regarding Claim 3, Lan in view of Ishigami discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Lan further discloses the processing method for an additively manufactured article according to claim 1, wherein the medium includes a steel ball medium (Lan: see English Translation, Page 6, lines 22-23, "the shot material is stainless steel").
Regarding Claim 4, Lan in view of Ishigami discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Lan further discloses the processing method for an additively manufactured article according to claim 1, wherein the additively manufactured article includes a blade of an aircraft engine or a medical component (Lan: see English Translation, Page 2, lines 21-22, wherein it is disclosed that “additive manufacturing of metal components is widely used in aerospace, biomedicine and other fields”; see also Lan, English Translation, Page 3, line 28, wherein “blades and integral bladed disks” are disclosed when discussing shot peening; see also Lan, English Translation, Page 8, lines 23-25, wherein polishing slurries “commonly used in the aerospace field are listed here”).
Regarding Claim 5, Lan in view of Ishigami discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Lan further discloses the processing method for an additively manufactured article according to claim 1, wherein the barrel polishing device includes a centrifugal barrel polishing device, and the medium is spherical, and a diameter of the medium is 20 mm or less (see Ishigami, Paragraph [0113] and [0069], wherein “centrifugal barrel polishing” is one of several processes compatible with polishing media 1, and the polishing media may be a sphere; see also Lan, English Translation, Page 6, lines 22-23, wherein the stainless steel shot material has a diameter of 3-5mm).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hoffman (US 6875081 B2) discloses a method for forming a tool having a smooth surface finish.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JON M HEGEMIER whose telephone number is (571)467-6405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/JON M HEGEMIER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights