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 1-7 are pending and the subject of this NON-FINAL Office Action. This is the first action on the merits.
Claim 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 1-7 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, it is unclear what are the “different modeling conditions.” Specifically, claim 1 previously states “such that at least one of a type of the first modeling material, a depositing pitch, a separation distance in a depositing direction, a modeling pattern, and a condition for layer disposition in a lateral direction is different.” These seem to be “modeling conditions” or at least comprised by this generic phrase. In fact, the specification states that all of the listed alternatives above are modeling conditions (paras. 0080-82). Yet, claim 1 does not label them “modeling conditions.” Thus, it is unclear if the “modeling conditions” of claim 1 are the same as the those listed as alternative “differences” in claim 1.
Further as to claim 1, it is unclear what is different from what. Claim 1 states “such that at least one of a type of the first modeling material, a depositing pitch, a separation distance in a depositing direction, a modeling pattern, and a condition for layer disposition in a lateral direction is different.” However, this clause fails to explain what is different from what. For example, is the base layer different from the contact layer (as explained in Spec, paras. 0080-82)? Or are the various listed alternatives different from each other? Or something else. In other words, Applicants must specify the difference referents (x different from y).
In claim 4, it is unclear what is the same as what. Claim 4 states “a material used for modeling the contact layer is different from a material used for modeling the base layer and is same as a material used for modeling a lowermost layer of the object.” Before the comparison, there are two materials: base layer material and contact layer material. It is unclear which (or if both) is compared to the material used for modeling a lowermost layer of the object.
Similarly, in claim 6, it is unclear whether (a) a material used for modeling a layer of the raft layer that is in contact with the second portion or (b) a material used for modeling a layer of the raft layer that is in contact with the first portion and not in contact with the second portion (or both) is compared to the material used for modeling a lowermost layer of the object.
Claim 7 is confusing because “the lowermost layer of the object” lacks antecedent basis in claim 1 or claim 7. It is unclear to what this refers.
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) A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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; or
(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SADUSK (US20140371895).
As to claim 1, SADUSK teaches a method for manufacturing a three-dimensional object, the method comprising:
a first modeling step of extruding a first modeling material to model a raft layer 806/900/902/904/906 on a modeling surface of a stage (Figs. 8-9); and
a second modeling step of extruding a second modeling material and depositing a modeling layer 810/812 on the raft layer to model an object (Figs. 8-9), wherein
the raft layer is separated from the object after the second modeling step is completed (paras. 0003 & 0135-36), and
the first modeling step includes at least one of
modeling the raft layer by separately modeling 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 such that at least one of a type of the first modeling material, a depositing pitch, a separation distance in a depositing direction, a modeling pattern, and a condition for layer disposition in a lateral direction is different (multiple raft layers, each with different materials, or multiple raft layers one or more with materials different from one or more object layers; paras. 0143, 0145-50 & 0160), and
modeling the raft layer by separately modeling a first layer and a second layer arranged in the lateral direction under different modeling conditions (Figs. 8-12).
As to claim 2, SADUSK teaches the method for manufacturing a three-dimensional object according to claim 1, wherein
the first modeling step includes modeling a first base layer and a second base layer arranged in the lateral direction and a first contact layer and a second contact layer arranged in the lateral direction (Figs. 8-12).
As to claim 3, SADUSK teaches the method for manufacturing a three-dimensional object according to claim 1, wherein
the first modeling step includes modeling a first base layer and a second base layer arranged in the lateral direction and the contact layer extending over the first base layer and the second base layer (Figs. 8-12).
As to claim 4, SADUSK teaches the method for manufacturing a three-dimensional object according to claim 1, wherein
a material used for modeling the contact layer is different from a material used for modeling the base layer and is same as a material used for modeling a lowermost layer of the object (para. 0160).
As to claim 5, SADUSK teaches the method for manufacturing a three-dimensional object according to claim 1, wherein
the first modeling step includes separately modeling a first contact layer and a second contact layer arranged in the lateral direction under different modeling conditions (Figs. 8-12 and para. 0160).
As to claim 6, SADUSK teaches the method for manufacturing a three-dimensional object according to claim 1, wherein
the object includes a first portion and a second portion having a height higher than that of the first portion (Fig. 9), and
a material used for modeling a layer of the raft layer that is in contact with the second portion is different from a material used for modeling a layer of the raft layer that is in contact with the first portion and not in contact with the second portion and is same as a material used for modeling a lowermost layer of the object (Fig. 9).
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.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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 1743