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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4 are examined.
Claims 5-19 are withdrawn.
Response to Amendment
The amendments to the claims and specifications overcome the previous 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 rejections and objections to the specification; therefore, the rejections and objections are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
claim 1, line 13-14 – add “of the at least two regions” after “a first region” and “a second region” to recitation to “at least two regions” in line 11.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding the limitation “the recoater includes a first region formed from a rigid material and a second region formed from a flexible material”, the “region” is interpreted as any part of the recoater and its assembly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (GB 2543305 A) in view of Tucker (US 2019/0344346 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Clark discloses a powder bed fusion (PBF) additive manufacturing system (¶ [0031] – powder bed manufacturing apparatus), comprising:
a powder delivery mechanism configured to deliver build powder (¶ [0031] – powder hopper 8) to a build area (¶ [0031] – powder 3 is deposited within the chamber) of an annular build plate (¶ [0031] – annular chamber 6) to form a build powder bed (¶ [0031] – component 7 is built within a powder bed) while the annular build plate rotates when the PBF additive manufacturing system is in operation (¶ [0031] – 6 rotates about its vertical axis 1 during the building of 7); and
a recoater (¶ [0031] – leveling blade 10) configured to provide a uniform density of powder packing of the build powder in the build powder bed (¶ [0040] – powder spread into a layer of constant thickness) while the annular build plate rotates (¶ [0031] – 6 rotates about its vertical axis 1 during the building of 7) when the PBF additive manufacturing system is in operation (¶ [0031] – 6 rotates during building of 7), wherein
the recoater comprises at least one segment positioned at an acute angle relative to an axis perpendicular to a direction of rotation of the annular build plate (¶ [0040] – 10 acutely angled to the surface of the bed) and wherein
the recoater includes at least two regions having different mechanical properties selected to provide a desired distribution of build powder over selected portions of the powder bed (¶ [0040] – one or more scraper blades 10, may extend substantially radially or angled away from the centre of rotation and may be linear or curved; therefore, the angles and shape of the multiple blades having different mechanical properties to provide desired distribution of powder).
In arguendo, Clark does not disclose the recoater includes at least two regions having different mechanical properties selected to provide a desired distribution of build powder over selected portions of the powder bed, Tucker is applied.
Analogous art Tucker discloses an additive manufacturing system comprising a recoating assembly (¶ [0003]). The recoating assembly 80 includes the curved recoater blade 82 positioned at a bottom end 140 of a mounting jig 142 (¶ [0038]).
Tucker discloses the recoater includes at least two regions having different mechanical properties (¶ [0039] - the curved recoater blade 82 may be a hard (e.g., rigid) recoater blade or a soft (flexible) recoater blade, where the soft recoater blade may have a higher degree of flexibility relative to the hard recoater blade) selected to provide a desired distribution of build powder over selected portions of the powder bed.
Clark and Tucker disclose apparatuses with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the recoater assembly with a hard, rigid material and a flexible materials as taught in Tucker to the leveling blade to allow the leveling blade to distribute, meter and level (e.g., smooth) the powder particles and form the build layer, such that a consistent lateral and radial distribution and depth of the powder particles across the annular build plate is achieved (¶ [0036-0037]).
Clark does not disclose wherein the recoater includes a first region formed from a rigid material and a second region formed from a flexible material.
Tucker further discloses the recoater includes a first region 142 formed from a rigid material (¶ [0039] – in embodiments, mounting jig 142 and the curved recoater blade 82 are manufactured from different materials, manufactured from stainless steel, steel, … or other suitable material; hard rigid) and a second region 82 formed from a flexible material (¶ [0039] – in embodiments, 142 and 82 are manufactured from different materials; soft recoater blade; fabricated from flexible materials, such as silicone, rubber, or other suitable flexible material).
Clark and Tucker disclose apparatuses with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the recoater assembly with a mounting jig manufactured from a hard, rigid material and a soft recoater blade fabricated from flexible materials as taught in Tucker to the leveling blade to allow the leveling blade to distribute, meter and level (e.g., smooth) the powder particles and form the build layer, such that a consistent lateral and radial distribution and depth of the powder particles across the annular build plate is achieved (¶ [0036-0037]).
Regarding claim 2, Clark discloses the PBF additive manufacturing system of claim 1, wherein the annular build plate further comprises:
an inner radius wall and an outer radius wall (¶ [0031] – radially outer external wall 2 and a radially inner wall 16 together provide 6), wherein the inner radius wall and the outer radius wall extend vertically from a junction (FIG. 1 depicts 2 and 16 extend vertically from actuator 13) with the annular build plate to define the build area and inner radius wall and the outer radius wall (¶ [0031] – base plate 4 is an annular plate that rotates with the inner and outer walls; FIG. 1 depicts 4 between 2 and 16) each include a plurality of apertures (¶ [0042] – gap between adjacent chambers in a multiple chamber arrangement) that are configured to collect excess build powder and direct the excess build powder through the inner radius wall and outer radius wall to an excess build powder reservoir (¶ [0042] – collection hoppers may be provided to collect excess powder for subsequent storage and re-use); wherein the recoater is further configured to direct the excess build powder through the inner radius wall and outer radius wall to the excess build powder reservoir (¶ [0040] – one or more scraper blades 10, may extend substantially radially or angled away from the centre of rotation).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (GB 2543305 A), as applied to claim 1, alternatively, in view of Oemer (WO 2018033405 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Clark discloses the PBF additive manufacturing system of claim 1. Clark discloses the recoater has a segment positioned at an acute angle relative to an axis perpendicular to a direction of rotation of the annular build plate (¶ [0040] - the scraper blades 10 are acutely angled to the surface of the bed to ensure the powder is spread into a layer of constant thickness).
Clark does not explicitly disclose wherein the recoater has a chevron shape and comprises two segments that are each positioned at an acute angle relative to an axis perpendicular to a direction of rotation of the annular build plate.
However, it has been held the specific shape of a claimed apparatus was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed apparatus was significant. See MPEP § 2144.04 (IV)(B). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the scraper blades with a chevron shape so to be acutely angled to the surface of the bed to ensure the powder is spread into a layer of constant thickness (¶ [0040]).
In arguendo Clark does not disclose a chevron shape, Oemer is applied.
Oemer discloses a coating device for additive build-up of a component (¶ [0089]).
Oemer discloses wherein the recoater (¶ [0089] – coating device 60) has a chevron shape (FIG. 18 depicts a chevron shape of 60) and comprises two segments that are each positioned at an acute angle relative to an axis perpendicular to a direction of rotation of the annular build plate (¶ [0090] – coater surface BF is divided into two mutually angled sub-surfaces 70; FIG. 18 depicts 70 are at an acute angle relative to an axis perpendicular to direction of rotation/coating direction).
PNG
media_image1.png
741
763
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Oemer FIG. 18
Clark and Oemer disclose apparatuses with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the coating device with a coater surface divided into two mutually angled sub-surfaces in Oemer to the scraper blades in Clark to ensure that an edge contour of a component is automatically approached or “hit” at a specific angle when the coating unit is moved by a suspension or discharge device in the direction of the coating direction (¶ [0093-0094]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (GB 2543305 A), as applied to claim 1, in view of Oemer (WO 2018033405 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Clark discloses the PBF additive manufacturing system of claim 1. Clark discloses the scraper blades 10 are acutely angled to the surface of the bed to ensure the powder is spread into a layer of constant thickness (¶ [0040]). The scraper blades may be angled away from the centre of rotation and may be linear or curved (¶ [0040]).
Clark further discloses the recoater includes a first region having mechanical properties selected to provide a honing effect (¶ [0041] - scraper blades are used to control the way the powder is removed from the surface of the bed, it is desirable to direct the powder radially outwards where it can be captured and stored).
Clark does not disclose wherein the recoater includes a second region having mechanical properties selected to be tolerant of elevation differences associated with secondary features of the part to be built on the PBF additive manufacturing system.
Oemer discloses a coating device for additive build-up of a component (¶ [0089]). The term “edge contour” refers to the outer edges of the layer built up or to be built up on the building platform and the contour of the component on the building platform formed by the edges (¶ [0015]).
Oemer discloses wherein the recoater (¶ [0089] – coating device 60) includes a first region having mechanical properties selected to provide a honing effect (¶ [0090] – coater surface BF is divided into two mutually angled sub-surfaces 70) on a characterizing feature of a part to be built on the PBF additive manufacturing system and a second region having mechanical properties selected to be tolerant of elevation differences (¶ [0091] – an edge contour of a component at an angle other than 90°) associated with secondary features of the part to be built on the PBF additive manufacturing system.
Clark and Oemer disclose apparatuses with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the coating device with a coater surface divided into two mutually angled sub-surfaces and an edge contour at an angle other than 90° in Oemer to the scraper blades in Clark to ensure that an edge contour of a component is automatically approached or “hit” at a specific angle when the coating unit is moved by a suspension or discharge device in the direction of the coating direction (¶ [0093-0094]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DE 102014010929 A1 discloses three reciprocating coating devices, which have different building material engagement elements a coating blade, a coating lip, or a coating brush
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 JONATHAN B WOO whose telephone number is (571)272-5191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
/JONATHAN B WOO/Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights