DETAILED ACTION
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 statement (IDS) submitted on 06/04/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
(a)(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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Munenaka et al. (US 2016/0339724).
With respect to claim 1, Munenaka teaches a method for printing a plurality of layers of an object on a surface in an XY plane in a print direction in the XY plane in at least one pass of at least one printhead of a printing system (“three-dimensional shaping apparatus 100”, Pa [0066]) relatively over the surface per layer, while ejecting filling material from nozzles of the at least one printhead towards the surface, wherein nozzle distances between the nozzles of the at least one printhead determine a first resolution in a direction perpendicular to the print direction (“On shaping stage 140, shaping material layers are formed and stacked by head unit 120 so as to shape three-dimensional object 200. To be more specific, when forming one shaping material layer, head unit 120 discharges the shaping material toward shaping stage 140 while moving from one end to the other end on shaping stage 140 in a main scanning direction (X direction in the drawing) orthogonal to the arrangement direction of the discharge nozzles of head unit 120”, Pa [0042]; “First discharge part 122 includes a plurality of discharge nozzles 122A linearly arranged in the longitudinal direction (a direction orthogonal to the X direction in FIG. 2)”, Pa [0047]),
wherein the at least one printhead is rotatable parallel to the XY plane (“guide member 151 of head unit movement part 150 is rotated with respect to shaping stage 140.”, Pa [0066]) and the method comprises the steps of:
a) receiving specifications of the object which define the object to be printed with a second resolution in the direction perpendicular to the print direction, the second resolution being higher than the first resolution (“Control part 110 acquires 3D data from data input part 170, and performs analysis processing and arithmetic processing of the acquired 3D data. Control part 110 converts 3D data acquired from data input part 170 into pieces of slice data thinly cut with respect to the lamination direction. The pieces of slice data are data of respective shaping material layers for shaping three-dimensional object 200.”, Pa [0039]; “during the shaping operation of three-dimensional object 200, control part 110 controls the entire operation of three-dimensional shaping apparatus 100.”, Pa [0040]; “the arrangement direction of discharge nozzles 122A and 124A (the Y direction in the drawing) is oblique to the main scanning direction, and that discharge nozzles 122A and 124A move in the main scanning direction with the arrangement direction tilted, …With this configuration, the resolution can be increased.”, Pa [0077]);
b) rotating at least one of the at least one printhead parallel to the XY plane such that projections of the nozzle distances on a direction perpendicular to the print direction correspond to the second resolution (“the arrangement direction of discharge nozzles 122A and 124A (the Y direction in the drawing) is oblique to the main scanning direction, and that discharge nozzles 122A and 124A move in the main scanning direction with the arrangement direction tilted, …With this configuration, the resolution can be increased.”, Pa [0077]); and
c) printing the plurality of layers of the object with the second resolution by ejecting filling material from the nozzles of the at least one rotated printhead towards the surface (“shaping material layers are formed and stacked by head unit 120 so as to shape three-dimensional object 200.”, Pa [0047]).
Even though Munenaka does not explicitly mention receiving specifications of the object which define the object to be printed with a second resolution, Munenaka teaches that control part 110 converts 3D data acquired from data input part 170 into pieces of slice data which are data of respective shaping material layers for shaping three-dimensional object 200 (Pa [0039]), control part 110 controls the entire operation of three-dimensional shaping apparatus 100 (Pa [0040]) and the arrangement direction of discharge nozzles 122A and 124A (the Y direction in the drawing) is oblique to the main scanning direction, and that discharge nozzles 122A and 124A move in the main scanning direction with the arrangement direction tilted, with this configuration, the resolution can be increased (Pa [0077]), thus one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the data includes the second resolution being higher that the first resolution. Alternatively, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to allow the control part to receive the data including the second resolution for the purpose of shaping a desired three-dimensional object with the second resolution.
With respect to claim 2, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the step of printing of the layers of the object comprises the sub-step of adapting firing moments of the nozzles in time in order to print the object according to the received specifications (“While moving in the main scanning direction (X direction) orthogonal to the longitudinal direction, first discharge part 122 selectively discharges droplets of the shaping material from discharge nozzles 122A toward shaping stage 140.”, Pa [0047]).
With respect to claim 3, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the rotating step comprises a rotation of the at least one printhead with a rotation angle unequal to zero radians (“the arrangement direction of discharge nozzles 122A and 124A (the Y direction in the drawing) is oblique to the main scanning direction, and that discharge nozzles 122A and 124A move in the main scanning direction with the arrangement direction tilted”, Pa [0077]).
With respect to claim 4, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the step of receiving specifications of the object to be printed comprises the sub-step of receiving a width of the object to be printed, said width being parallel to the XY plane and being orthogonal to the print direction (“Control part 110 acquires 3D data from data input part 170”, Pa [0039]), but does not explicitly teach that the method comprises the step of defining the second resolution by means of said width. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that as the angle of the discharge part is decreased from the perpendicular orientation, the pitch and the area that is swept by the discharge part decrease, thus one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to define the resolution based on the width for the purpose of shaping a three-dimensional object with the discharge part.
With respect to claim 5, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the step of receiving specifications of the object to be printed comprises the sub-step of receiving a specification of at least one kind of filling material which is to be used during printing of the object (“Control part 110 acquires 3D data from data input part 170, and performs analysis processing and arithmetic processing of the acquired 3D data. Control part 110 converts 3D data acquired from data input part 170 into pieces of slice data thinly cut with respect to the lamination direction. The pieces of slice data are data of respective shaping material layers for shaping three-dimensional object 200.”, Pa [0039]; “Head unit 120 may include three or more discharge parts which can respectively discharge shaping materials of different colors. It is also possible to adopt a configuration in which a shaping material serving as a model material which forms a shaping article is discharged from one discharge part, and a shaping material serving as a supporting material which holds the shaping article during the shaping and is removed after the shaping is discharged from the other discharge part.”, Pa [0046]; “When forming one shaping material layer, first discharge part 122 discharges droplets of the shaping material based on slice data corresponding to the shaping material layer.”, Pa [0047]; “second discharge part 124 discharges droplets of the shaping material based on slice data corresponding to the shaping material layer.”, Pa [0048]).
With respect to claim 6, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the step of rotating at least one of the at least one printhead parallel to the XY plane comprises the sub-step of rotating the at least one of the at least one printhead parallel to the XY plane with a rotation angle which corresponds to a third resolution (“the arrangement direction of discharge nozzles 122A and 124A (the Y direction in the drawing) is oblique to the main scanning direction, and that discharge nozzles 122A and 124A move in the main scanning direction with the arrangement direction tilted, …With this configuration, the resolution can be increased.”, Pa [0077]), and further teaches that in the continuous system, a charged shaping material is continuously discharged, and the electric field is controlled to attach the droplet only by a required amount, while the shaping material which is not required for formation of the shaping material layer is collected by a predetermined shaping material receiver (Pa [0052]), and when forming one shaping material layer, first discharge part 122 discharges droplets of the shaping material based on slice data corresponding to the shaping material layer (Pa [0047]), thus one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the data includes volume/size of droplets. Alternatively, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to select volume/size of droplets with the resolution for the purpose of shaping a desired three-dimensional object with the resolution.
With respect to claim 10, Munenaka teaches a printing system (“three-dimensional shaping apparatus 100”, Pa [0066]) for printing a plurality of layers of an object on a surface in an XY plane in a print direction in the XY plane in at least one pass of at least one printhead of the printing system relatively over the surface per layer, the at least one printhead comprising a plurality of nozzles for ejecting filling material towards the surface, wherein nozzle distances between the nozzles of the plurality of nozzles determine a first resolution in a direction perpendicular to the print direction (“On shaping stage 140, shaping material layers are formed and stacked by head unit 120 so as to shape three-dimensional object 200. To be more specific, when forming one shaping material layer, head unit 120 discharges the shaping material toward shaping stage 140 while moving from one end to the other end on shaping stage 140 in a main scanning direction (X direction in the drawing) orthogonal to the arrangement direction of the discharge nozzles of head unit 120”, Pa [0042]; “First discharge part 122 includes a plurality of discharge nozzles 122A linearly arranged in the longitudinal direction (a direction orthogonal to the X direction in FIG. 2)”, Pa [0047]) and the at least one printhead is rotatable parallel to the XY plane (“guide member 151 of head unit movement part 150 is rotated with respect to shaping stage 140.”, Pa [0066]), and
wherein the printing system comprises a print controller configured to execute the method according to claim 1 (“Control part 110 acquires 3D data from data input part 170, and performs analysis processing and arithmetic processing of the acquired 3D data. Control part 110 converts 3D data acquired from data input part 170 into pieces of slice data thinly cut with respect to the lamination direction. The pieces of slice data are data of respective shaping material layers for shaping three-dimensional object 200.”, Pa [0039]; “during the shaping operation of three-dimensional object 200, control part 110 controls the entire operation of three-dimensional shaping apparatus 100.”, Pa [0040]).
With respect to claim 11, Munenaka as applied to claim 10 above teaches that each printhead is extended with a printhead holder that is rotatable in the XY plane (“guide member 151 of head unit movement part 150 is rotated with respect to shaping stage 140.”, Pa [0066]).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munenaka et al. (US 2016/0339724) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Beauchamp et al. (US 6,523,934).
With respect to claims 7 and 8, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the method comprises the step of selecting a plurality of filling materials for printing the object, each filling material intended to be ejected by a dedicated printhead (“Head unit 120 may include three or more discharge parts which can respectively discharge shaping materials of different colors. It is also possible to adopt a configuration in which a shaping material serving as a model material which forms a shaping article is discharged from one discharge part, and a shaping material serving as a supporting material which holds the shaping article during the shaping and is removed after the shaping is discharged from the other discharge part.”, Pa [0046]), but does not explicitly teach that each filling material intended to be ejected with a dedicated print resolution by a dedicated printhead and rotating each dedicated printhead parallel to the XY plane with a rotation angle that corresponds to the dedicated resolution.
In the same field of endeavor, variable positioning of a printhead, Beauchamp teaches that a printer includes a printhead stall rotatable about a Z-axis; a mechanism for rotating the printhead stall about the Z-axis; and a controller for controlling the mechanism to change slant angle of the printhead stall as a function of primitive spacing (co 1 li 44-49), and using a printhead having a standard pair of nozzle columns, the inkjet printer can print as much as six times faster than a conventional printer using the same printhead, and the inkjet printer does not produce gaps between printed swaths (co 2 li 14-19). Beauchamp further teaches that the slant angle of the printhead is related to the ratio of the desired scan resolution and the number of nozzles in a primitive (co 3 li 35-39), and the printer 10 may have a mechanism that moves the printhead stalls individually instead of moving them as a group, Fig. 9, for example, shows a carriage assembly 302 including a mounting plate 304 and three printhead stalls 306, an off-center cam 308 and motor (not shown) are provided for rotating a printhead stall 304 (co 5 li 60-65 and Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Munenaka with the teachings of Beauchamp such that the one would substitute Beauchamp’s carriage assembly for Munenaka’s head unit and guide member for the purpose of faster printing. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to select the filling materials, each filling material intended to be ejected with a dedicated print resolution by a dedicated printhead and rotating each dedicated printhead parallel to the XY plane with a rotation angle that corresponds to the dedicated resolution for the purpose of shaping the desired three-dimensional object.
With respect to claim 9, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that the printing system comprises at least two printheads (“head unit 120 including first discharge part 122 and second discharge part 124”, Pa [0069]), but does not explicitly teach that one of the at least two printheads is not rotated.
In the same field of endeavor, variable positioning of a printhead, Beauchamp teaches that a printer includes a printhead stall rotatable about a Z-axis; a mechanism for rotating the printhead stall about the Z-axis; and a controller for controlling the mechanism to change slant angle of the printhead stall as a function of primitive spacing (co 1 li 44-49), and using a printhead having a standard pair of nozzle columns, the inkjet printer can print as much as six times faster than a conventional printer using the same printhead, and the inkjet printer does not produce gaps between printed swaths (co 2 li 14-19). Beauchamp further teaches that the slant angle of the printhead is related to the ratio of the desired scan resolution and the number of nozzles in a primitive (co 3 li 35-39), and the printer 10 may have a mechanism that moves the printhead stalls individually instead of moving them as a group, Fig. 9, for example, shows a carriage assembly 302 including a mounting plate 304 and three printhead stalls 306, an off-center cam 308 and motor (not shown) are provided for rotating a printhead stall 304 (co 5 li 60-65 and Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Munenaka with the teachings of Beauchamp such that the one would substitute Beauchamp’s carriage assembly for Munenaka’s head unit and guide member for the purpose of faster printing. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to not rotate one of the printhead stalls in order to meet the desired resolution in case where the desired resolution does not require slanting the printhead.
With respect to claim 12, Munenaka as applied to claim 1 above teaches that control part 110 has a computing part such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit), control part 110 acquires 3D data from data input part 170, and performs analysis processing and arithmetic processing of the acquired 3D data, control part 110 converts 3D data acquired from data input part 170 into pieces of slice data thinly cut with respect to the lamination direction, the pieces of slice data are data of respective shaping material layers for shaping three-dimensional object 200 (Pa [0039]), in addition, during the shaping operation of three-dimensional object 200, control part 110 controls the entire operation of three-dimensional shaping apparatus 100 (Pa [0040]), but is silent to a computer program product, including computer readable code embodied on a non-transitory computer readable medium, said computer readable code comprising instructions for executing the steps of the method according to claim 1.
In the same field of endeavor, variable positioning of a printhead, Beauchamp teaches that a printer includes a printhead stall rotatable about a Z-axis; a mechanism for rotating the printhead stall about the Z-axis (co 1 li 44-46), and a printer controller 20 (e.g., an embedded processor and embedded read-only memory storing firmware for the processor) for receiving swath data from a host (e.g. a host computer) and using the swath data to fire nozzles of the printheads 12, each bit of the swath data indicates whether a printhead nozzle should be actuated at a specific position along the sheet, and the printer controller 20 also controls the carriage assembly 14, the paper path 16 and the scan mechanism 18 (co 2 li 25-33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Munenaka with the teachings of Beauchamp such that the one would provide/embed the processor and embedded read-only memory storing firmware for the processor with the control part in order to function the control part in the form of the embedded processor and embedded read-only memory storing firmware for the processor, since it has been held that the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUNJU KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1146. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00-4:00 EST M-Th; Flexing Fri.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached on 571-272-1176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YUNJU KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742