DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-13 are pending in the present application.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/20/2026 and 07/05/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 13 describes a computer program, it appears that said claims, taken as a whole, read on computer listings per se.
Computer programs claimed as computer listings per se, i.e., the descriptions or expressions of the programs, are not physical "things." They are neither computer components nor statutory processes, as they are not "acts" being performed. Such claimed computer programs do not define any structural and functional interrelationships between the computer program and other claimed elements of a computer which permit the computer program's functionality to be realized. In contrast, a claimed non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with a computer program is a computer element which defines structural and functional interrelationships between the computer program and the rest of the computer which permit the computer program's functionality to be realized, and is thus statutory. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1583-84, 32 USPQ2d at 1035.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 12-13 are objected to because of the following informalities: “a three-dimensional CAD/CAM system” should be “three-dimensional computer aided design (CAD)/ computer aided manufacturing (CAM) system”, “stores CSG data” should be “stores constructive solid geometry (CSG) data”, “an NC data generation unit” should be “an numerical control (NC) data generation unit”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term "means" or "step" or a term used as a substitute for "means" that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word "for" (e.g., "meansfor") or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word "means"(or "step")in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word "means" (or "step") in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word "means" (or "step") are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word "means" (or "step") are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word "means," but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
"a primitive generation unit that uses"; "a storage unit that stores"; “dexel generation unit that determines”, and "an NC data generation unit that generates" in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2 and 8-13 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7 and 9-10 of copending Application No. 18/705938 in view of U.S. PGpubs 2016/0188770 to Montana et al., further in view U.S. PGPubs 2012/0221300 toTukora.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Regarding claim 1:
18726942
18705938
[Claim 1] A three-dimensional CAD/CAM system comprising:
a primitive generation unit that uses a differential polyhedron model which is a set of differential polyhedrons including coordinate values of triangle vertices, normal vectors of the triangle vertices, and curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points to form a curved surface by connecting sides of the differential polyhedron and form a closed surface by connecting curved surfaces with a curved surface boundary line, thereby generating a primitive which is a set of points belonging to the inside of the closed surface;
a storage unit that stores CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives; a
dexel generation unit that determines an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model; and
an NC data generation unit that generates NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel.
[Claim 1] A three-dimensional CAD system comprising:
a primitive generation unit that uses a differential polyhedron model which is a set of differential polyhedrons including coordinate values of triangle vertices, normal vectors of the triangle vertices, and curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points to form a curved surface by connecting sides of the differential polyhedron and form a closed surface by connecting curved surfaces with a curved surface boundary line, thereby generating a primitive which is a set of points belonging to the inside of the closed surface; and
a storage unit that stores CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives; and
a representation processing unit that determines an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby calculating a reflection position and a reflection direction of a light ray in the solid model.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other (see the comparison between claim 1 of the instant invention and claim 1 of the 18705938) except generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model; and an NC data generation unit that generates NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel.
In related endeavor, Montana et al. teach generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model (par 0037, “providing a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, each dexel comprising a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the workpiece”, par 0058, “providing S10 a set of dexels that represents (in 3D) the workpiece (the set of dexels and/or the workpiece being also referred to as “modeled volume/object” in the following). By definition, each dexel comprises a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the (e.g. volume occupied by the) workpiece. Here, a dexel corresponds to positions (i.e. the segment(s) of the dexel) on the line where there is material of the workpiece. It is however noted that the term “dexel” may alternatively designate the data associated to all lines of such a 3D model, such that some dexels may be deprived of any material/segments, e.g. from the beginning or by the method”, par 0086-0087, “Given a modeled volume and given an infinite line, a dexel is the set of segments (or intervals) representing the intersection between the infinite line and the modeled volume (of the workpiece). This set of segments is captured, in the memory, as a set of boundary points of each segment …. A dexel structure is a set of dexels (each comprising a set of segments) which are organized, for example by being ordered on a rectangular grid (e.g. sharing same direction, e.g. the whole structure comprising three grids whose directions are orthogonal two by two). FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate a modeled volume 40 together with a ten by ten grid of lines 50. The method of the example comprises providing modeled volume 40 (representing a workpiece), e.g. as a B-Rep, as illustrated on FIG. 7. The method of the example then comprises defining a ten by ten grid of lines 50 that intersect (at least partly) modeled volume 40, as illustrated on FIG. 8. The method of the example then comprises computing dexels 65 which comprise sets of segments 60 and/or 62, as represented on FIG. 9. One dexel 65 is circled on the figure.”); and
In related endeavor, Tukora teaches an NC data generation unit that generates NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel (abstract, “wherein the surface segments of the tool thus obtained are described by display coordinates and depth coordinates associated with said respective display coordinates. In predetermined positions of the tool along the tool path, the depth coordinates of each dexel are compared to the depth coordinates of the surface segments of the tool or the swept volume of the tool that have the same display coordinates as those ones of the dexel, and accordingly, for each of the dexels, the intersection points of the particular dexel and the surface segments of the tool (S130) are determined”, par 0001-0002, “The simulation method disclosed in this document is based on the generation of a so called dexel representation of the workpiece and the tool. In this method, the dexel representation contains a plurality of dexels generated in one direction, wherein the neighbour dexels are stored as neighbour elements of a data matrix, whereas subsequent dexels belonging to a particular straight line are stored in a chained manner. In this method, a dexel representation of the milling tool or of the volume swept by the milling tool (swept volume) at the actual position of the tool is computed step by step while the tool advances in the workpiece, and the difference between the dexel representation of the workpiece and that of the milling tool is then determined. Based on the dexel representation of the workpiece thus obtained, a modified shape of the workpiece is determined, and this shape is then presented on a display by using appropriate computer graphic methods. For the visualization, positions of the surface points of the workpiece and those of the tool are mapped into the coordinate system of the display”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified 18705938 to include generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model as taught by Montana et al. to accurately provide a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, a trajectory of the cutting tool, and a set of meshes each representing a respective cutting part or non-cutting part of the cutting tool to enable dynamic, knowledge-based product creation and decision support that drives optimized product definition, manufacturing preparation, production and service.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified 18705938 as modified by Montana et al. to include an NC data generation unit that generates NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel as taught by Tukora to allow to recognize possible deficiencies arising during the milling operation, such as milling process errors, collisions, inappropriate milling parameters, etc., even before actually completing a particular operation to low the cost of the production and improve the efficiency of the production.
Likewise instant dependent claims 2 and 8-11 are anticipated by dependent claims 2-5 and 7 of the 18705938, and is not patentably distinct from claims 2-5 and 7 of the 18705938.
Regarding claim 12:
18726942
18705938
[Claim 12] A three-dimensional CAD/CAM method including:
a primitive generation step of using a differential polyhedron model which is a set of differential polyhedrons including coordinate values of triangle vertices, normal vectors of the triangle vertices, and curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points to form a curved surface by connecting sides of the differential polyhedron and form a closed surface by connecting curved surfaces with a curved surface boundary line, thereby generating a primitive which is a set of points belonging to the inside of the closed surface;
a storage step of storing CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives;
a dexel generation step of determining an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model; and
an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel.
[Claim 9] A three-dimensional CAD method including:
a primitive generation step of using a differential polyhedron model which is a set of differential polyhedrons including coordinate values of triangle vertices, normal vectors of the triangle vertices, and curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points to form a curved surface by connecting sides of the differential polyhedron and form a closed surface by connecting curved surfaces with a curved surface boundary line, thereby generating a primitive which is a set of points belonging to the inside of the closed surface;
a storage step of storing CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives; and
a representation processing step of determining an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby calculating a reflection position and a reflection direction of a light ray in the solid model.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other (see the comparison between claim 12 of the instant invention and claim 9 of the 18705938) except generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model; and an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel.
In related endeavor, Montana et al. teach generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model (par 0037, “providing a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, each dexel comprising a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the workpiece”, par 0058, “providing S10 a set of dexels that represents (in 3D) the workpiece (the set of dexels and/or the workpiece being also referred to as “modeled volume/object” in the following). By definition, each dexel comprises a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the (e.g. volume occupied by the) workpiece. Here, a dexel corresponds to positions (i.e. the segment(s) of the dexel) on the line where there is material of the workpiece. It is however noted that the term “dexel” may alternatively designate the data associated to all lines of such a 3D model, such that some dexels may be deprived of any material/segments, e.g. from the beginning or by the method”, par 0086-0087, “Given a modeled volume and given an infinite line, a dexel is the set of segments (or intervals) representing the intersection between the infinite line and the modeled volume (of the workpiece). This set of segments is captured, in the memory, as a set of boundary points of each segment …. A dexel structure is a set of dexels (each comprising a set of segments) which are organized, for example by being ordered on a rectangular grid (e.g. sharing same direction, e.g. the whole structure comprising three grids whose directions are orthogonal two by two). FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate a modeled volume 40 together with a ten by ten grid of lines 50. The method of the example comprises providing modeled volume 40 (representing a workpiece), e.g. as a B-Rep, as illustrated on FIG. 7. The method of the example then comprises defining a ten by ten grid of lines 50 that intersect (at least partly) modeled volume 40, as illustrated on FIG. 8. The method of the example then comprises computing dexels 65 which comprise sets of segments 60 and/or 62, as represented on FIG. 9. One dexel 65 is circled on the figure.”); and
In related endeavor, Tukora teaches an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel (abstract, “wherein the surface segments of the tool thus obtained are described by display coordinates and depth coordinates associated with said respective display coordinates. In predetermined positions of the tool along the tool path, the depth coordinates of each dexel are compared to the depth coordinates of the surface segments of the tool or the swept volume of the tool that have the same display coordinates as those ones of the dexel, and accordingly, for each of the dexels, the intersection points of the particular dexel and the surface segments of the tool (S130) are determined”, par 0001-0002, “The simulation method disclosed in this document is based on the generation of a so called dexel representation of the workpiece and the tool. In this method, the dexel representation contains a plurality of dexels generated in one direction, wherein the neighbour dexels are stored as neighbour elements of a data matrix, whereas subsequent dexels belonging to a particular straight line are stored in a chained manner. In this method, a dexel representation of the milling tool or of the volume swept by the milling tool (swept volume) at the actual position of the tool is computed step by step while the tool advances in the workpiece, and the difference between the dexel representation of the workpiece and that of the milling tool is then determined. Based on the dexel representation of the workpiece thus obtained, a modified shape of the workpiece is determined, and this shape is then presented on a display by using appropriate computer graphic methods. For the visualization, positions of the surface points of the workpiece and those of the tool are mapped into the coordinate system of the display”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified 18705938 to include generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model as taught by Montana et al. to accurately provide a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, a trajectory of the cutting tool, and a set of meshes each representing a respective cutting part or non-cutting part of the cutting tool to enable dynamic, knowledge-based product creation and decision support that drives optimized product definition, manufacturing preparation, production and service.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified 18705938 as modified by Montana et al. to include an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel as taught by Tukora to allow to recognize possible deficiencies arising during the milling operation, such as milling process errors, collisions, inappropriate milling parameters, etc., even before actually completing a particular operation to low the cost of the production and improve the efficiency of the production.
Regarding claim 13:
18726942
18705938
[Claim 13] A three-dimensional CAD/CAM program that causes a computer to execute:
a primitive generation step of using a differential polyhedron model which is a set of differential polyhedrons including coordinate values of triangle vertices, normal vectors of the triangle vertices, and curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points to form a curved surface by connecting sides of the differential polyhedron and form a closed surface by connecting curved surfaces with a curved surface boundary line, thereby generating a primitive which is a set of points belonging to the inside of the closed surface;
a storage step of storing CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives;
a dexel generation step of determining an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model; and
an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel.
[Claim 10] A three-dimensional CAD program that causes a computer to execute:
a primitive generation step of using a differential polyhedron model which is a set of differential polyhedrons including coordinate values of triangle vertices, normal vectors of the triangle vertices, and curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points to form a curved surface by connecting sides of the differential polyhedron and form a closed surface by connecting curved surfaces with a curved surface boundary line, thereby generating a primitive which is a set of points belonging to the inside of the closed surface;
a storage step of storing CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives; and
a representation processing step of determining an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby calculating a reflection position and a reflection direction of a light ray in the solid model.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other (see the comparison between claim 13 of the instant invention and claim 10 of the 18705938) except generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model; and an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel.
In related endeavor, Montana et al. teach generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model (par 0037, “providing a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, each dexel comprising a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the workpiece”, par 0058, “providing S10 a set of dexels that represents (in 3D) the workpiece (the set of dexels and/or the workpiece being also referred to as “modeled volume/object” in the following). By definition, each dexel comprises a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the (e.g. volume occupied by the) workpiece. Here, a dexel corresponds to positions (i.e. the segment(s) of the dexel) on the line where there is material of the workpiece. It is however noted that the term “dexel” may alternatively designate the data associated to all lines of such a 3D model, such that some dexels may be deprived of any material/segments, e.g. from the beginning or by the method”, par 0086-0087, “Given a modeled volume and given an infinite line, a dexel is the set of segments (or intervals) representing the intersection between the infinite line and the modeled volume (of the workpiece). This set of segments is captured, in the memory, as a set of boundary points of each segment …. A dexel structure is a set of dexels (each comprising a set of segments) which are organized, for example by being ordered on a rectangular grid (e.g. sharing same direction, e.g. the whole structure comprising three grids whose directions are orthogonal two by two). FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate a modeled volume 40 together with a ten by ten grid of lines 50. The method of the example comprises providing modeled volume 40 (representing a workpiece), e.g. as a B-Rep, as illustrated on FIG. 7. The method of the example then comprises defining a ten by ten grid of lines 50 that intersect (at least partly) modeled volume 40, as illustrated on FIG. 8. The method of the example then comprises computing dexels 65 which comprise sets of segments 60 and/or 62, as represented on FIG. 9. One dexel 65 is circled on the figure.”); and
In related endeavor, Tukora teaches an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel (abstract, “wherein the surface segments of the tool thus obtained are described by display coordinates and depth coordinates associated with said respective display coordinates. In predetermined positions of the tool along the tool path, the depth coordinates of each dexel are compared to the depth coordinates of the surface segments of the tool or the swept volume of the tool that have the same display coordinates as those ones of the dexel, and accordingly, for each of the dexels, the intersection points of the particular dexel and the surface segments of the tool (S130) are determined”, par 0001-0002, “The simulation method disclosed in this document is based on the generation of a so called dexel representation of the workpiece and the tool. In this method, the dexel representation contains a plurality of dexels generated in one direction, wherein the neighbour dexels are stored as neighbour elements of a data matrix, whereas subsequent dexels belonging to a particular straight line are stored in a chained manner. In this method, a dexel representation of the milling tool or of the volume swept by the milling tool (swept volume) at the actual position of the tool is computed step by step while the tool advances in the workpiece, and the difference between the dexel representation of the workpiece and that of the milling tool is then determined. Based on the dexel representation of the workpiece thus obtained, a modified shape of the workpiece is determined, and this shape is then presented on a display by using appropriate computer graphic methods. For the visualization, positions of the surface points of the workpiece and those of the tool are mapped into the coordinate system of the display”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified 18705938 to include generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model as taught by Montana et al. to accurately provide a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, a trajectory of the cutting tool, and a set of meshes each representing a respective cutting part or non-cutting part of the cutting tool to enable dynamic, knowledge-based product creation and decision support that drives optimized product definition, manufacturing preparation, production and service.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified 18705938 as modified by Montana et al. to include an NC data generation step of generating NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel as taught by Tukora to allow to recognize possible deficiencies arising during the milling operation, such as milling process errors, collisions, inappropriate milling parameters, etc., even before actually completing a particular operation to low the cost of the production and improve the efficiency of the production.
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) 1-2 and 8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Japan PGPubs JP2022-72158 to Taguchi et al. in view of U.S. PGPubs 2014/0244018 Bach et al., further in view of U.S. PGPubs 2016/0188770 to Montana et al., further in view U.S. PGPubs 2012/0221300 toTukora.
Regarding claim 1, Taguchi et al. teach a three-dimensional CAD/CAM system comprising (par 0017-0018, “As shown in FIG. 1, the information processing method according to the present embodiment includes an input step (S1) for inputting a 3D CAD model, a conversion step (S2) for converting a 3D CAD model into a triangular aggregate model, and a triangular shape”):
a primitive generation unit that uses a differential polyhedron model which is a set of differential polyhedrons including coordinate values of triangle vertices, normal vectors of the triangle vertices, and curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points to form a curved surface by connecting sides of the differential polyhedron and form a closed surface by connecting curved surfaces with a curved surface boundary line, thereby generating a primitive which is a set of points belonging to the inside of the closed surface (par 0017, “inputting a 3D CAD model, a conversion step (S2) for converting a 3D CAD model into a triangular aggregate model, and a triangular shape. It has a generation step (S3) of extracting a ridge line connecting the sides of a triangle using an aggregate model and generating a differential polyhedron model.”, par 0019-0021, “the CAD model is converted into an aggregate model of triangles including the coordinate values of the triangle vertices and the normal vector of the triangle vertices. This aggregate model is an STL model with a normal vector added by calculating the normal vector of the vertices from the CAD data when outputting the STL. The STL model with a normal vector is output by a program from a curved surface represented by a cubic polynomial …. The differential polyhedron model is a simple and clear data expression, can express the smoothness of a curved surface, and can express the phase information of a solid model. Further, the differential polyhedron model is a polygon model of a triangular mesh model and can be converted into an obj format which is a data format for CG (Computer Graphics)”, par 0075-0078, “FIG. 31 is a diagram for explaining the triangulation of the curved surface, FIG. 31 (A) shows the curved surface of the 3D CAD model, and FIG. 31 (B) is a differential polyhedron obtained by approximating the curved surface of the 3D CAD model with a triangular polyhedron. Show the model. As shown in FIG. 31 (B), the differential polyhedron model approximates the curved surface of the 3D CAD model with a specified error, the vertices of the triangle exist exactly on the curved surface, and the normal vector at the vertices is 3D CAD. It accurately represents the normal vector of the curved surface of the model. That is, the distance when a point on a triangle is projected onto a curved surface is guaranteed to be within a specified error range”).
But Taguchi et al. keep silent for teaching a storage unit that stores CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives.
In related endeavor, Bech et al. teach a storage unit that stores CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives (par 0055, “Further examples include data formats representing the 3D shape as a volume, such as a voxel-based data format (e.g. RAW, DAT, OpenQVis, Fields 3D). Furthermore, the digital representation of the toy construction set may be stored in a data format for storing a tree representation of a Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG); this allows storing of an entire design process. For example, such a tree format may be implemented as an XML format representing a tree structure and includes pointers or other references to respective data files or objects (e.g. represented in Wavefront OBJ format) having stored representation of the basic shapes on which the CSG tree structure is based”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified Taguchi et al. to include a storage unit that stores CSG data which represents a solid model in CSG representation by a tree structure of set operations of the primitives as taught by Bech et al. to store in a data format for storing a tree representation of a Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG) for 3D object to read a data structure and to convert such a data structure into a known graphic format for presentation on a computer display to provide the digital representation for automated production of said user-defined construction element to allow an automated production of 3D objects based on a digital, computer-generated representation of an object.
But Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al. keep silent for teaching a dexel generation unit that determines an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model.
In related endeavor, Montana et al. teach a dexel generation unit that determines an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model (par 0019, “For polygonal representations, many collision detection methods are based on classical geometrical objects such as Binary Space Partitions or Oriented Bounding Volumes. Several algorithms exist for solids represented by CSG. The CSG structure describes a 3D closed solid as the result of a sequence of Boolean operations performed on simple primitives”, par 0037, “providing a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, each dexel comprising a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the workpiece”, par 0058, “providing S10 a set of dexels that represents (in 3D) the workpiece (the set of dexels and/or the workpiece being also referred to as “modeled volume/object” in the following). By definition, each dexel comprises a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the (e.g. volume occupied by the) workpiece. Here, a dexel corresponds to positions (i.e. the segment(s) of the dexel) on the line where there is material of the workpiece. It is however noted that the term “dexel” may alternatively designate the data associated to all lines of such a 3D model, such that some dexels may be deprived of any material/segments, e.g. from the beginning or by the method”, par 0086-0087, “Given a modeled volume and given an infinite line, a dexel is the set of segments (or intervals) representing the intersection between the infinite line and the modeled volume (of the workpiece). This set of segments is captured, in the memory, as a set of boundary points of each segment …. A dexel structure is a set of dexels (each comprising a set of segments) which are organized, for example by being ordered on a rectangular grid (e.g. sharing same direction, e.g. the whole structure comprising three grids whose directions are orthogonal two by two). FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate a modeled volume 40 together with a ten by ten grid of lines 50. The method of the example comprises providing modeled volume 40 (representing a workpiece), e.g. as a B-Rep, as illustrated on FIG. 7. The method of the example then comprises defining a ten by ten grid of lines 50 that intersect (at least partly) modeled volume 40, as illustrated on FIG. 8. The method of the example then comprises computing dexels 65 which comprise sets of segments 60 and/or 62, as represented on FIG. 9. One dexel 65 is circled on the figure.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al. to include a dexel generation unit that determines an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line from the intersection point between the closed surface of the primitive and the straight line by a set operation based on the CSG data, thereby generating a dexel which is a line segment group included in the solid model as taught by Montana et al. to accurately provide a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, a trajectory of the cutting tool, and a set of meshes each representing a respective cutting part or non-cutting part of the cutting tool to enable dynamic, knowledge-based product creation and decision support that drives optimized product definition, manufacturing preparation, production and service.
But Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al. and Montana et al. keep silent for teaching an NC data generation unit that generates NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel.
In related endeavor, Tukora teaches an NC data generation unit that generates NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel (abstract, “wherein the surface segments of the tool thus obtained are described by display coordinates and depth coordinates associated with said respective display coordinates. In predetermined positions of the tool along the tool path, the depth coordinates of each dexel are compared to the depth coordinates of the surface segments of the tool or the swept volume of the tool that have the same display coordinates as those ones of the dexel, and accordingly, for each of the dexels, the intersection points of the particular dexel and the surface segments of the tool (S130) are determined”, par 0001-0002, “The simulation method disclosed in this document is based on the generation of a so called dexel representation of the workpiece and the tool. In this method, the dexel representation contains a plurality of dexels generated in one direction, wherein the neighbour dexels are stored as neighbour elements of a data matrix, whereas subsequent dexels belonging to a particular straight line are stored in a chained manner. In this method, a dexel representation of the milling tool or of the volume swept by the milling tool (swept volume) at the actual position of the tool is computed step by step while the tool advances in the workpiece, and the difference between the dexel representation of the workpiece and that of the milling tool is then determined. Based on the dexel representation of the workpiece thus obtained, a modified shape of the workpiece is determined, and this shape is then presented on a display by using appropriate computer graphic methods. For the visualization, positions of the surface points of the workpiece and those of the tool are mapped into the coordinate system of the display”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modified Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al. and Montana et al. to include an NC data generation unit that generates NC data for positioning a tool on the basis of the dexel as taught by Tukora to allow to recognize possible deficiencies arising during the milling operation, such as milling process errors, collisions, inappropriate milling parameters, etc., even before actually completing a particular operation to low the cost of the production and improve the efficiency of the production.
Regarding claim 2, Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al., Montana et al., and Tukora teach all the limitation of claim 1, and further teach wherein the dexel generation unit uses real-time ray tracing to determine an intersection point between the solid model and a straight line (Montana et al.: par 0037, “providing a set of dexels that represents the workpiece, each dexel comprising a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the workpiece”, par 0058, “providing S10 a set of dexels that represents (in 3D) the workpiece (the set of dexels and/or the workpiece being also referred to as “modeled volume/object” in the following). By definition, each dexel comprises a set of at least one segment representing the intersection between a line and the (e.g. volume occupied by the) workpiece. Here, a dexel corresponds to positions (i.e. the segment(s) of the dexel) on the line where there is material of the workpiece. It is however noted that the term “dexel” may alternatively designate the data associated to all lines of such a 3D model, such that some dexels may be deprived of any material/segments, e.g. from the beginning or by the method”, par 0086-0087, “Given a modeled volume and given an infinite line, a dexel is the set of segments (or intervals) representing the intersection between the infinite line and the modeled volume (of the workpiece). This set of segments is captured, in the memory, as a set of boundary points of each segment …. A dexel structure is a set of dexels (each comprising a set of segments) which are organized, for example by being ordered on a rectangular grid (e.g. sharing same direction, e.g. the whole structure comprising three grids whose directions are orthogonal two by two). FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate a modeled volume 40 together with a ten by ten grid of lines 50. The method of the example comprises providing modeled volume 40 (representing a workpiece), e.g. as a B-Rep, as illustrated on FIG. 7. The method of the example then comprises defining a ten by ten grid of lines 50 that intersect (at least partly) modeled volume 40, as illustrated on FIG. 8. The method of the example then comprises computing dexels 65 which comprise sets of segments 60 and/or 62, as represented on FIG. 9. One dexel 65 is circled on the figure.”, Tukora: abstract, par 0003, “The generation of an original dexel-based representation, which has been used conventionally and widely, includes the following steps. A grid with a given grid spacing is projected to a three dimensional plane, and from each grid point, a straight line is directed perpendicularly to that plane. In the following step, intersection points of the straight lines and the body, for example, a workpiece, are examined. Where a straight line intersects the surface of the body, a dexel (i.e. a depth element) is generated that is defined by the spatial coordinates of the point of entering into the body and the spatial coordinates of the point of leaving from the body, or other values derivable therefrom (for example, the coordinates of the entering point and the direction and the length of the dexel), and optionally by other additional parameters, such as the color, the material characteristics, etc. In case a straight line intersects the body multiple times, the subsequent dexels along the straight line are stored in the memory in a chained manner.”, par 0039, par 0061, “The above described system architecture allows to run the milling simulations using a tool of high complexity in real time by performing the methods according to the invention. (In the dexel-based methods, the volume of the tool was computed analytically”).
Regarding claim 8, Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al., Montana et al., and Tukora teach all the limitation of claim 1, and Taguchi et al. further teach wherein the primitive generation unit generates the differential polyhedron by adding, on the basis of the coordinate values of the triangle vertices and the normal vectors of the triangle vertices, curved line elements including start/end points consisting of the triangle vertices and tangent vectors at the start/end points (abstract, par 0010-0013, “the information processing method according to the present technology uses a set of triangles including the coordinate values of the triangle vertices and the normal vector of the triangle vertices to extract the ridgeline connecting the sides of the triangle, and the vertices at both ends of the ridgeline. Generates a differential polyhedron model with phase information including the coordinates of, the triangles on the left and right sides of the ridge, and the normal vectors on both ends of the left side of the ridge and both ends of the right side of the ridge. “, par 0019-0021, “the CAD model is converted into an aggregate model of triangles including the coordinate values of the triangle vertices and the normal vector of the triangle vertices. This aggregate model is an STL model with a normal vector added by calculating the normal vector of the vertices from the CAD data when outputting the STL. The STL model with a normal vector is output by a program from a curved surface represented by a cubic polynomial …. The differential polyhedron model is a simple and clear data expression, can express the smoothness of a curved surface, and can express the phase information of a solid model. Further, the differential polyhedron model is a polygon model of a triangular mesh model and can be converted into an obj format which is a data format for CG (Computer Graphics)”, par 0075-0078, “FIG. 31 is a diagram for explaining the triangulation of the curved surface, FIG. 31 (A) shows the curved surface of the 3D CAD model, and FIG. 31 (B) is a differential polyhedron obtained by approximating the curved surface of the 3D CAD model with a triangular polyhedron. Show the model. As shown in FIG. 31 (B), the differential polyhedron model approximates the curved surface of the 3D CAD model with a specified error, the vertices of the triangle exist exactly on the curved surface, and the normal vector at the vertices is 3D CAD. It accurately represents the normal vector of the curved surface of the model. That is, the distance when a point on a triangle is projected onto a curved surface is guaranteed to be within a specified error range”).
Regarding claim 9, Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al., Montana et al., and Tukora teach all the limitation of claim 1, and Taguchi et al. further teach wherein the primitive generation unit generates a spatial geodesic by using coordinate values of triangle vertices shared by adjacent first and second differential polyhedrons and normal vectors of the triangle vertices to construct a connection relation by sharing the spatial geodesic, thereby forming a curved surface (par 0048, “the subdivision process for subdividing the differential polyhedron model will be described in detail with reference to the drawings. The subdivision processing of the differential polyhedron model is executed by three processes: vertex copy processing, ridgeline division processing, and triangle division processing, and the spatial geodesic is created using the normal vectors of the vertices at both ends of the ridgeline of the differential polyhedron model. Generate and add vertices and normal vectors to the midpoint of the spatial geodesic to generate two ridges. By repeating the subdivision process, it is possible to generate a point cloud that exists densely on the curved surface as the limit. That is, it can be said that the differential polyhedron is not a curved surface such as a parametric curved surface or a solution of an algebraic equation, but a set of dense points and normal vectors on a certain curved surface”, also see par 0053-0059, “As shown in FIG. 18, a curve is generated on each side of the triangle using a spatial geodesic. The spatial geodesic is a curve that is perpendicular to the added normal vector at the apex of the triangle, and the direction of curvature at each point of the curve is parallel to the vector obtained by interpolating the normal vector”).
Regarding claim 10, Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al., Montana et al., and Tukora teach all the limitation of claim 1, and Taguchi et al. further teach wherein the primitive generation unit constructs a connection relation between the curved surfaces by using a curved line element shared between the curved surfaces, thereby forming a closed surface connecting the curved surfaces (par 0033, “FIG. 5 is a diagram for explaining a process of generating a differential polyhedron model in which edges of triangles are connected to form a curved surface. As shown in FIG. 5, in the set model of triangles, vertices are defined as points and edges are defined as edges. Then, when the edges coincide with each other, they are regarded as the same line, which is defined as a ridgeline, and both end points of the ridgeline are defined as vertices”).
Regarding claim 11, Taguchi et al. as modified by Bech et al., Montana et al., and Tukora teach all the limitation of claim 1, and Taguchi et al. further teach wherein the curved line element composed of tangent vectors at the start/end points is represented by a cubic polynomial curve shown by Formula 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
82
683
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[Formula 1] +ID ; 0 < t < curved line element length (1)-4- Here, Z,B,C and D are coefficients (par 0019, “The STL model with a normal vector is output by a program from a curved surface represented by a cubic polynomial, for example, with a specified accuracy. The STL model with a normal vector is preferably output with the precision of a double precision floating point number”).
Regarding claim 12, the method claim 12 is similar in scope to claim 1 and is rejected under the same rational.
Regarding claim 13, Taguchi et al. teach a three-dimensional CAD/CAM program that causes a computer to execute (par 0026, “As shown in FIG. 4, the computer device 1 includes a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 11 that performs program execution processing, a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) 12 that performs arithmetic processing, and a ROM that stores a program executed by the CPU 11. (Read Only Memory) 13, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 14 that expands programs and data, an operation input unit 15 that receives various input operations by the user, and a storage 16 that fixedly stores programs and data. It includes an input / output interface 17 for inputting / outputting data”). The remaining limitations of the claim are similar in scope to claim 1 and rejected under the same rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The cited prior art fails to teach the combination of elements recited in claim 3, including " wherein the NC data generation unit generates NC data for positioning a tool by cutting a complement dexel which is a line segment group not included in the dexel with an inverse tool".
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jin Ge whose telephone number is (571)272-5556. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 to 5:00.
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, Jason Chan can be reached at (571)272-3022. 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.
JIN . GE
Examiner
Art Unit 2619
/JIN GE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights