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
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-9 are pending and the subject of this FINAL Office Action.
New Grounds of Rejections - 35 USC § 112- Indefiniteness
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In claim 1, there is confusion at the precise point of potential novelty and non-obviousness. As an initial matter, Applicants indicate that the following subject matter renders the claims distinguishable from all prior art:
modeling the raft layer by separately modeling a first raft layer and a second raft layer arranged in the lateral direction such that a first modeling condition in which the first raft layer is modeled is different from a second modeling condition in which the second raft layer is modeled.
However, this clause is confusing in light of the claim itself, and the specification. First, the claim previously states that “the raft layer” is “separately model[ed] [into] a base layer in contact with the modeling surface and a contact layer disposed above the base layer and to come into contact with the object.” Thus, the single raft layer has sublayers of “base layer” and “contact layer,” or two layers, one on top of the other. Yet, the clause under contention seems to contradict this by stating the raft layer has two raft layers. Even more, it is unclear, from the claim itself, why the clause recites “separately modeling a first raft layer and a second raft layer arranged in the lateral direction.” Layers are material one over the other; not next to each other. It is unclear what “lateral direction” here plays. In other words, looking only at the claim language, there seems to be two different, contradictory sublayers of the raft layer, with confusion as to the lateral aspect.
Yet, when One looks to the specification, the confusion deepens. The Specification does not describe layers of rafts; rather, divisions of rafts, which would make sense of the lateral aspect in the claims. Specifically, paragraphs 0066-67 describe
In the example of FIG. 8 , the raft layer RL is formed of a plurality of divided rafts Rp arranged in the lateral direction. For example, when a first divided raft Rp1, which is one divided raft Rp, is the first layer, a second divided raft Rp2, which is another divided raft Rp, corresponds to the second layer.
The first divided raft Rp1 and the second divided raft Rp2 each include the above-described base layer Bs, contact layer Ct, and middle layer Md. The base layer Bs, the contact layer Ct, and the middle layer Md provided in the first divided raft Rp1 are also referred to as a first base layer Bs1, a first contact layer Ct1, and a first middle layer Md1, respectively. The base layer Bs, the contact layer Ct, and the middle layer Md provided in the second divided raft Rp2 are also referred to as a second base layer Bs2, a second contact layer Ct2, and a second middle layer Md2, respectively. The first base layer Bs1 and the second base layer Bs2 are the base layers Bs arranged in the lateral direction. The first contact layer Ct1 and the second contact layer Ct2 are the contact layers Ct arranged in the lateral direction. The first middle layer Md1 and the second middle layer Md2 are the middle layers Md arranged in the lateral direction. The first contact layer Ct1 and the first middle layer Md1 are disposed above the first base layer Bs1 to correspond to the first base layer Bs1. The second contact layer Ct2 and the second middle layer Md2 are disposed above the second base layer Bs2 to correspond to the second base layer Bs2. It can be said that the raft layer RL is modeled such that such disposition of the base layer Bs, the contact layer Ct, and the middle layer Md can be implemented in the first modeling step. It can be said that the raft data is generated such that such disposition of the base layer Bs, the contact layer Ct, and the middle layer Md can be implemented in the data generation step. For example, when the first contact layer Ct1 is the first layer, the second contact layer Ct2 corresponds to the second layer. The same applies to the base layer Bs and the middle layer Md.
Figure 8 shows the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
450
802
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While this description makes sense, it is not the language of the claims. The claims use “layer” language instead of the specification’s “divided rafts” language. In light of this disconnect between the specification and the claims, the specification fails to clearly resolve the confusion.
Applicants are encouraged to amend the claims using the description from the specification in order to clearly and unambiguously claim their invention, and potentially distinguish the claimed subject matter from possible prior art.
Prior Art
The following prior art, among many, teaches extrusion-based raft/sacrificial/separation/support layers below object layers, each with different “modeling conditions” (which is ubiquitous in the art): US 20210078259; US 20170173867 (e.g. para. 0078; Figures); US 20200130256; US 20200131383; WO 2020189654; US 20150190965; US20190283131; US 9511547; US 20170106605; US 20170252969; US 20180043610; US 20200198250; US 20190168301; US 20210053275 (Fig. 10); US 20210146441.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MELODY TSUI whose telephone number is (571)272-1846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm.
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, Heather Calamita can be reached at 571-272-2876. 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.
/YUNG-SHENG M TSUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1684
Prosecution Insights