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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed Apr 23, 2026 from the bottom of page 9 to the page 11 in, with respect to claim 1 and its newly amended feature of a “single crystal” have been fully considered and are now moot in view of new grounds of rejection. Applicant’s arguments, filed Apr 23, 2026 on pages 7-9, with respect to claim 11 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image1.png
286
668
media_image1.png
Greyscale
….
PNG
media_image2.png
353
678
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In response to this argument, the Examiner respectfully maintains that it would have been obvious to use the scanning technology of Park with the system of Festa. Festa in paragraph [0080] recites: “… The 3D scanning system 100 may generate the texture model using the plurality of images of the object 110 captured while the object 110 is illuminated with visible light (e.g., white light).“. In this passage, Festa refers to scanning by illuminating the area with visible light. While Festa does not mention a RGB scanner per se, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably understand that if visible light is being used to illuminate the object during scanning that the scanner would likely also pick up visible light. Otherwise, the illumination of visible light over the object during scanning would not be of value for scanning. Thus, it would have been obvious to use a visible light scanner such as a RGB scanner of Park with the system of Festa (as it is described in paragraph [0080]).
In response to applicant's argument that Park is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Park is simply provide a RGB scanner to the system of Festa (which is already likely doing visible light RGB scanning). Further, dental cavity aspects of Park are not being relied upon for the rejection of independent claims 1 and 11 in the present invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Festa et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 20200082596), hereinafter as Festa, in view of Park et al. (KR 20220157245A), hereinafter as Park.
Regarding claim 11, Festa discloses a system for grain mapping of a surface of a component (Festa [0020] “In some embodiments, each of the first texture and the second texture is selected from the group consisting of: a wood, a metal, a fabric, a leather, a glass, a ceramic, and a plastic”), comprising:
a support for holding the component; a source for directing light at the component on the support; an RGB source for directing RGB light at the component on the support; a camera for capturing images reflected from the component on the support (Festa in figure 1 and in [0080]); and
a control operatively associated with the support, the source, the RGB source and the camera, and configured to: constructing a model comprising a three-dimensional scanned model of the component (Festa, Abstract “generating a 3-dimensional (3D) model of an object at least in part by analyzing a first plurality of images of the object captured using a first scanning device”); scanning the component with RGB light ( Festa paragraph [0065] and [0080]); applying the RGB light scan to the three-dimensional model of the component to produce a combined three-dimensional model of the component with an RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model (Festa Claim 1 “applying the texture model to a 3-dimensional (3D) model of an object to generate a textured 3D model of the object”); and
analyzing the RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model of the component to identify grain boundaries in the component (Festa paragraph [0062] “analyzing the shadows in each of the plurality of images created by the varying lighting conditions to identify small surface features (e.g., texture)”).
While Festa fails to teach the possible usage of visible RGB light in addition to the usage of structured light, Park teaches the usage of both visible RGB light and structured light to scan a 3D object (Park, paragraph [0017] “In order to scan the inside of the oral cavity, the projector unit irradiates structured light. In addition, illumination light is used to obtain a color image. In general, a projector unit uses rgb, that is, red light, green light, and blue light, and in particular, emits leds corresponding to each of the rgb for illumination light”).
Festa and Park are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of scanning a 3D object. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Festa to incorporate the teachings of Park and provide a 3D scanning process by utilizing structured light in addition to all types of RGB light to illuminate a color image of the object (Park paragraph [0017]). Doing so would allow the application of the RGB light scan to the three-dimensional scanned model of the component to produce a combined three-dimensional model of the component with an RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model (Festa Abstract; Park paragraphs [0003] and [0017]).
Festa continues to teach the apply the RGB light scan to the three-dimensional model of the component to produce a combined three-dimensional model of the component with an RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model ( Festa Claim 1 “applying the texture model to a 3-dimensional (3D) model of an object to generate a textured 3D model of the object”); and analyzing the RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model to identify grain boundaries in the component (Festa paragraph [0062] “analyzing the shadows in each of the plurality of images created by the varying lighting conditions to identify small surface features (e.g., texture)”).
Regarding claim 12, Festa continues to teach the system of claim 11, further comprising a conveyance connected with at least one of the supports, the source, the RGB source, and the camera, and wherein the control is operatively associated with the conveyance and configured to control the conveyance (Festa paragraph [0073]; Fig. 1 “A computing device 108 may be communicatively coupled to the rotation device 106, the lighting system 104, and/or imaging system 102 to, for example, control their operation”; Festa paragraph [0078] “The computing device 108 may be configured to communicate with and control the imaging system 102, the lighting system 104, and/or the rotation device 106. For example, the computing device 108 may send signals and/or receive signals from the imaging system 102, the lighting system 104, and/or the rotation device 106.”) to move at least one of the component, the RGB source and the camera during the scanning (Festa paragraph [0027] “the system comprises a rotation device configured to receive an object and rotate the object about at least one axis”; Festa Paragraphs [0070], [0008] “the lighting system may comprise, for example, a plurality of light sources each disposed at different positions above the material and configured to emit light to illuminate the material”; Festa paragraph [00874], Fig. 1 “The imaging system 102 may be configured to capture a plurality of images of the object 110 from multiple perspectives using imaging sensors 114A-114C. The imaging sensors 114A-114C may, for example, all be located in a common plane that is perpendicular to a top surface of the rotation device 106 and aimed at the object”).
Regarding claim 13, Fest further discloses the system of claim 12, wherein the source and the RGB source are a single light source (Festa paragraph [0086] “the light source 210 may be advantageously configured to emit colored light (e.g., red light, blue light, green light, etc.)”).
Regarding claim 14, Park further teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the control is configured such that the constructing comprises scanning the component with structured light from the source of structured light (Park, abstract “3D scanner according to one embodiment of the present invention comprises: a projector unit emitting structured light to an object to be scanned”), receiving reflected images of structured light at the camera, and producing the three-dimensional model from the reflected images (Park paragraph [0138] “the irradiated light is reflected from the inside of the oral cavity, that is, the object to be scanned, and may be received by the camera unit 80 in the reverse order to generate an image”; Park paragraph [0004] “the optical image is transmitted to the pc, and 3d modeling is performed on the pc”).
Since Festa and Park are both from the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to an artisan before the effective filing date of this application to incorporate the known techniques of Festa in order to use a scanning device to scan a 3D object utilizing multiple light sources (“in order to scan the inside of the oral cavity, the projector unit irradiates structured light. In addition, illumination light is used to obtain a color image. In general, a projector unit uses RGB” Park paragraph [0017]; “the lighting system may comprise a plurality of light sources such as light emitting diodes, fluorescent lamps, and/or incandescent bulbs. The light from one or more light sources of the plurality of light sources may be diffused using, for example, a diffusive element disposed between the one or more light sources and the object. The plurality of light sources may be configured to emit the same type of light or different types of light” Festa paragraph [0065]).
Regarding claim 15, Festa further discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the constructing step and the scanning step are conducted simultaneously (Festa paragraph [0116] “the acts performed as part of each process may be ordered in any suitable way. Thus, embodiments may be constructed in which acts are performed in an order different than illustrated, which may include performing some acts simultaneously, even though shown as sequential acts in illustrative embodiments”).
Regarding claim 16, Festa further discloses the system of claim 12, wherein the analyzing step comprises comparing different views of the combined three-dimensional model of the component with the RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model (Festa paragraph [0066] “at least one computing device may, in turn, employ the plurality of captured images from multiple perspectives to generate a 3D model of the object”; Festa paragraph [0073]; Fig. 1 “the scanning system may generate a 3D model of the object 110 by, for example, capturing a plurality of images of the object 110 from multiple perspectives and analyzing the plurality of captured images using photogrammetry techniques to generate the 3D model”), wherein a change in color and/or contrast in the different views indicates a grain boundary (Festa paragraph [0107] “each of the plurality of images may be captured under different, non-uniform lighting conditions (e.g., illuminated with light sources from different directions) to create shadows in the image. In this example, the shadows may be analyzed to identify the texture of the material”).
Regarding claim 17, Festa further teaches a system The system of claim 16, wherein the control is configured to carry out the comparing step by scanning for a first region that is darker than a second region in a first view of the model and wherein the second region is darker than the first region in a second view of the model, and identifying a contrast boundary between the first region and the second region. (Festa paragraphs [0090], [0079] “the computing device may, then, analyze the plurality of captured images using various techniques, such as photogrammetry techniques, to construct a 3D model” and Festa paragraph [0082] “the differing lighting conditions may cause different shadows to form in each of the plurality of images. The different shadows may be employed to, for example, identify the texture of the material”).
Regarding claim 18, Festa further discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the control is configured to carry out the comparing by identifying color and/or contrast change in different views of the model and mapping the color and/or contrast change to location of boundaries in the model (Festa paragraph [0092] “the computing device may apply the texture model to the 3D model using, for example, a UV map that assigns portions of a texture model (e.g., pixels in a texture model) to faces on the 3D model. The UV map may, for example, be generated in act 302 simultaneously with the 3D model. In these embodiments, the computing device may identify one or more surfaces of the 3D model which to apply a texture model and apply the texture model to the identified one or more surfaces of the 3D model using the UV map”).
Regarding claim 19, Festa further teaches a system wherein the control (Festa, paragraph [0088] “the computer may, in turn, analyze the plurality of captured images to generate a texture model of a texture of the material 222”.
In this passage, the control in this case is the computer, since both are used to control the same functions of the system)
is further configured to map contrast boundaries on the three-dimensional model and output an image, a report or combinations thereof (Festa paragraph [0071] “the plurality of captured images of the material under different lighting conditions may be employed to generate a texture model of a texture of the material. The texture model may be generated by, for example, analyzing shadows in the captured images caused by the different lighting conditions that are, for example, indicative of a structure of surface features on the material”; Festa paragraph [0082] “the scanning system 200 may generate a texture model of a texture of the material 222 by, for example, capturing a plurality of images of the material 222 under different lighting conditions and analyzing the plurality of captured images to generate the texture model”; Festa paragraph [0088] “The computer may, in turn, analyze the plurality of captured images to generate a texture model of a texture of the material”; Festa paragraph [0107]; Fig. 5 “In act 508, the scanning system may generate a texture model using the captured image(s). The scanning system may generate the texture model using the captured image(s) in any of a plurality of ways. For example, each of the plurality of images may be captured under different, non-uniform lighting conditions (e.g., illuminated with light sources from different directions) to create shadows in the image. In this example, the shadows may be analyzed to identify the texture of the material”).
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Festa in view of Park in further view of Hirao (US 20120175740 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Festa discloses a method for grain mapping of a surface of Examiner’s note: the amendment to the preamble limits the claim scope and is given patentable weight-MPEP 211.02):
constructing a model comprising a three-dimensional scanned model of the component (Festa, Abstract “generating a 3-dimensional (3D) model of an object at least in part by analyzing a first plurality of images of the object captured using a first scanning device”); scanning the component with RGB light to obtain an RGB light scan (Festa paragraph [0065]).
While Festa fails to teach the possible usage of visible RGB light in addition to the usage of structured light, Park teaches the usage of both visible RGB light outside the spectrum of ultraviolet, and structured light to scan a 3D object (Park, paragraph [0017] “In order to scan the inside of the oral cavity, the projector unit irradiates structured light. In addition, illumination light is used to obtain a color image. In general, a projector unit uses rgb, that is, red light, green light, and blue light, and in particular, emits leds corresponding to each of the rgb for illumination light”).
Festa and Park are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of scanning a 3D object. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Festa to incorporate the teachings of Park and provide a 3D scanning process by utilizing structured light in addition to all types of RGB light to illuminate a color image of the object (Park paragraph [0017]). Doing so would allow the application of the RGB light scan to the three-dimensional scanned model of the component to produce a combined three-dimensional model of the component with an RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model (Festa Abstract; Park paragraphs [0003] and [0017]).
Festa continues to teach the application of the RGB light scan to the three-dimensional scanned model of the component to produce a combined three-dimensional model of the component with an RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model (Festa Claim 1 “applying the texture model to a 3-dimensional (3D) model of an object to generate a textured 3D model of the object”); and analyzing the combined three-dimensional model of the component with the RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model to identify grain boundaries in the component (Festa paragraph [0062] “analyzing the shadows in each of the plurality of images created by the varying lighting conditions to identify small surface features (e.g., texture)”).
While Festa and Park fail to teach the possible usage of grain mapping of a surface of a single crystal component, Hirao teaches the usage of RBG light in order to identify the grain boundary of a single crystal surface (Hirao [0063] “FIG. 10 shows a fluorescent microscope image when light with a wavelength of 330 to 385 nm was applied to a cross-section of the recovered GaN crystal cut along the {1-100}. In this fluorescent microscope image, the base substrate 18 appears light green (light gray in FIG. 10), and the GaN single crystal appears indigo-blue (dark gray in FIG. 10). In the GaN single crystal, an impurity band light-emission portion palely glowing as a streak (light gray in FIG. 10) is a grain boundary.”
Hirao [0064] “The surface of the resulting GaN single crystal was mirror-finished and was immersed in a mixed solution of sulfuric acid and phosphoric acid at 250.degree. C. for about 2 hours, so that an etching treatment was performed. […] As described above, regarding the place just above the formed grain boundary (or inclusion) among the surface of the GaN single crystal, no dislocation was observed and, therefore, it is believed that propagation of dislocation in the GaN single crystal was stopped by the grain boundary”
Hirao [0065] “In this regard, in FIG. 10, the horizontal distance from the height difference to the GaN single crystal surface reached by the grain boundary was about 2 mm”).
Thus it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Festa and Park by the teaching of Hirao for use in a single crystal component, since using two Festa and Park teaches grain mapping of a surface (including boundaries) of a variety of materials to include metals (see Festa paragraphs 0020, 0049, 0061 and 0069, where Festa discloses the surface of component can include “material such as wood, metal, fabric, leather, glass, ceramic, plastic, etc.”), Hirao further teaches the method is used on single crystal component materials to provide identification of grain boundaries.
Regarding Claim 2, where Festa fails to teach the usage of structured lighting, Park discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the constructing step comprises scanning the component with structured light to produce the three-dimensional scanned model (Park, paragraph [0003] “for 3D modeling, an optical image needs to be acquired through an oral scanner, and a patterned light or a structural light is irradiated onto a surface of a tooth or the like to photograph the image with an optical camera to acquire an optical image”; ” Park paragraph [0005] “In the oral scanner, in order to examine the pattern light of the structured light, projector is used; Park paragraph [0017] “In order to scan the inside of the oral cavity, the projector unit irradiates structured light”).
Since Festa and Park are both from the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to an artisan before the effective filing date of this application to incorporate the known techniques of Festa in order to use a scanning device to scan a 3D object utilizing multiple light sources (Park paragraph [0017] “in order to scan the inside of the oral cavity, the projector unit irradiates structured light. In addition, illumination light is used to obtain a color image. In general, a projector unit uses RGB”; Festa paragraph [0065] “the lighting system may comprise a plurality of light sources such as light emitting diodes, fluorescent lamps, and/or incandescent bulbs. The light from one or more light sources of the plurality of light sources may be diffused using, for example, a diffusive element disposed between the one or more light sources and the object. The plurality of light sources may be configured to emit the same type of light or different types of light”).
Regarding claim 3, Festa further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the constructing step and the scanning step are conducted simultaneously (”Festa paragraph [0116] “the acts performed as part of each process may be ordered in any suitable way. Thus, embodiments may be constructed in which acts are performed in an order different than illustrated, which may include performing some acts simultaneously, even though shown as sequential acts in illustrative embodiments).
Regarding claim 4, Festa further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the scanning step comprises scanning the component with RGB light from an RGB light source and capturing RGB light reflected from the component with a camera (Festa Fig. 1, elements 114A-114C, described in paragraph [0074] “one or more of the imaging sensors 114A-114C may be digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) cameras or digital single lens translucent (DSLT) cameras”).
Regarding claim 5, Festa continues to teach the method of claim 4, further comprising moving at least one of the component, the RGB source and the camera during the scanning (Festa paragraph [0027] “the system comprises a rotation device configured to receive an object and rotate the object about at least one axis”, Festa Paragraphs [0070], [0008] “the lighting system may comprise, for example, a plurality of light sources each disposed at different positions above the material and configured to emit light to illuminate the material”, Festa paragraph [00874], Fig. 1 “The imaging system 102 may be configured to capture a plurality of images of the object 110 from multiple perspectives using imaging sensors 114A-114C. The imaging sensors 114A-114C may, for example, all be located in a common plane that is perpendicular to a top surface of the rotation device 106 and aimed at the object”).
Regarding claim 6, Festa further discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the analyzing step comprises comparing different views of the combined three-dimensional model of the component with the RGB light scan overlay on the three-dimensional model (Festa paragraph [0066] “at least one computing device may, in turn, employ the plurality of captured images from multiple perspectives to generate a 3D model of the object”); Festa paragraph [0073]; Fig. 1 “the scanning system may generate a 3D model of the object 110 by, for example, capturing a plurality of images of the object 110 from multiple perspectives and analyzing the plurality of captured images using photogrammetry techniques to generate the 3D model”), wherein a change in color and/or contrast in the different views indicates a grain boundary Festa paragraph [0107] (“each of the plurality of images may be captured under different, non-uniform lighting conditions (e.g., illuminated with light sources from different directions) to create shadows in the image. In this example, the shadows may be analyzed to identify the texture of the material”).
Regarding claim 7, Festa further discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the change in color and/or contrast represents a first region that is darker than a second region in a first view and wherein the second region is darker than the first region in a second view, and identifying a contrast boundary between the first region and the second region (Festa paragraph [0082] “the differing lighting conditions may cause different shadows to form in each of the plurality of images. The different shadows may be employed to, for example, identify the texture of the material”).
Regarding claim 8, Festa continues to teach the method of claim 6, further comprising mapping region boundaries on the three-dimensional model and outputting an image, a report or combinations thereof (Festa paragraph [0071] “the plurality of captured images of the material under different lighting conditions may be employed to generate a texture model of a texture of the material. The texture model may be generated by, for example, analyzing shadows in the captured images caused by the different lighting conditions that are, for example, indicative of a structure of surface features on the material”; Festa paragraph [0082] “the scanning system 200 may generate a texture model of a texture of the material 222 by, for example, capturing a plurality of images of the material 222 under different lighting conditions and analyzing the plurality of captured images to generate the texture model”; Festa paragraph [0088] “The computer may, in turn, analyze the plurality of captured images to generate a texture model of a texture of the material”; Festa paragraph [0107]; Fig. 5 “In act 508, the scanning system may generate a texture model using the captured image(s). The scanning system may generate the texture model using the captured image(s) in any of a plurality of ways. For example, each of the plurality of images may be captured under different, non-uniform lighting conditions (e.g., illuminated with light sources from different directions) to create shadows in the image. In this example, the shadows may be analyzed to identify the texture of the material”).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Festa, in view of Park, in view of Hirao, in further view of Hack et al.(U.S. Patent 5874066 A), hereinafter as Hack.
Regarding claim 9, where Festa, Park, and Hirao all fail to teach the method of etching surfaces using acid, Hack discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising, before the constructing step, etching a surface of the component with an acid (Hack paragraph [42] “Accordingly, in one embodiment, the present invention provides benefits over currently used acidic treatments which have a greater tendency to etch the tooth surface”).
As Festa in paragraphs 0020, 0049, 0061 and 0069 discloses the surface of component can include “material such as wood, metal, fabric, leather, glass, ceramic, plastic, etc.”, and Hack teaches using acid on a surface of a 3D object, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Festa to incorporate the teachings of Hack to provide a method of etching a surface of a component with an acid (Hack paragraph [42) “the present invention provides benefits over currently used acidic treatments which have a greater tendency to etch the tooth surface”].
Festa, Park, and Hack are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the same field of analyzing surfaces of 3D components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Festa and Park to incorporate the teachings of Hack to provide a method of etching a surface of a component with an acid (“the present invention provides benefits over currently used acidic treatments which have a greater tendency to etch the tooth surface” Hack paragraph [42)]. Furthermore, applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results would have obvious within a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 10, Hack further discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the etching step comprises etching with an etchant containing ferric acid (Hack paragraph [49] “ii. a 3.0% (w/v) solution of potassium, sodium, ammonium, aluminum or ferric acid oxalate (monohydrogen oxalate) (pH 2-7)”), and then anodic etching in an etchant containing phosphoric acid (Hack paragraph [4] “etched for 30 sec with 37% (v/v) phosphoric acid”; Hack paragraph [10] “The results of the SEM analysis for dentin either left with the 600 grit smear layer (Sample A), or etched with 37% (v/v) phosphoric acid”).
Since Festa, Park, Hirao and Hack are all from the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to an artisan before the effective filing date of this application to incorporate the known technique of Hack in order to provide a method of etching a surface of a component with an acid. Specifically, ferric and phosphoric acids are widely used to etch metal surfaces. Ferric acid is known to be safer to handle while highly effective on a wide range of metals, and cost-effective. Phosphoric acid is known to etch a metal surface without scratching, gouging, or damaging the underlying healthy metal surface. Furthermore, applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results would have obvious within a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Festa, in view of Park in view of Hirao, in further view of Neway (NPL titled: Single Crystal Casting IN713LC Gas Turbines Components), hereinafter as Neway.
Regarding claim 20, where Festa, Park and Hirao fail to teach the method of grain mapping a single crystal turbine component, Neway discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the component is a single crystal turbine component (Please see Neway section ‘Manufacturing Solution for IN713LC Single Crystal Gas Turbine Components’, “Wax Assembly Engineering CFD-informed gating and selector designs are integrated to ensure clean metal flow and grain alignment.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention the component is single crystal turbine component because single crystal materials are commonly included in developing turbine components for engines, as taught by Neway (see text), since single crystal elements are known for durability in high temperature.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH Y. LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8374. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, Daniel F. Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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.
SARAH Y. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 2616
/ALICIA M HARRINGTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2615
Prosecution Insights