DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . It is responsive to the submission dated 03/20/2025. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. Claims 1 and 20 are independent claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 02/20/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and are being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharon et al. (US 10962958) or, in the alternative, as being unpatentable over Sharon in view of Yang et al. (US 20170368753).
Considering claims 1 and 4, Sharon discloses a computer-implemented method (see fig. 1) comprising:
obtaining an electronic design of a part geometry for a part for additive manufacturing (e.g., causing the additive manufacturing system to access a first model defining a shape of a part. See col. 2 lines 9-11 and col. 3 lines 23-32. In addition, Sharon discloses: Additive manufacturing processes manufacture parts layer-by-layer. A typical additive manufacturing process includes the following steps. First, a three-dimensional computer model of the part is created. Next the computer model of the part is sliced into a plurality of layers. Information about the first layer is then transmitted to an additive manufacturing machine, and the machine forms the first layer of the part. See col. 2 lines 58-65, wherein each of the sliced layers from the part encompasses the part geometry);
obtaining first datum information indicating a sequence of one or more datums for the part geometry, wherein the first datum information indicates at least a first datum (e.g., Sharon discloses: Information about the first layer is then transmitted to an additive manufacturing machine, and the machine forms the first layer of the part. Included with the information about the first layer (e.g., the part geometry) is information regarding … a scan path, and a scan speed to be used to build the first layer. The scan path refers to the direction and path the energy source in the additive manufacturing machine moves to solidify a layer of the part. The scan speed refers to the speed with which the energy source moves in the additive manufacturing machine to solidify the part. See col. 2 line 62 to col. 3 line 8. In addition, Sharon discloses: The shape of the part is segregated into a plurality of predefined shapes selected from a library of predefined shapes. See col. 2 lines 11-13 and col. 3 lines 33-49. The segregated predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 for each of predefined shapes A, B, C, D, E, and F that have been cut into a plurality of layers are stored in library 32 for use in additively manufacturing a part, and each of the stored predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 also include instructions for a scan path, and a scan speed for the additive manufacturing machine to use during the additive manufacturing process. See col. 3 lines 56-68, wherein the segregated part’s shape associated with the first layer information corresponds to the first datum and the prescribed shapes selected from the library corresponds with sequence of datums for the part geometry, as claimed);
obtaining a first electronic scan mapping of an object additively manufactured according to the electronic design of the part geometry (e.g., Sharon discloses: Information about the first layer is then transmitted to an additive manufacturing machine, and the machine forms the first layer of the part. Included with the information about the first layer (e.g., the part geometry) is information regarding … a scan path, and a scan speed to be used to build the first layer. The scan path refers to the direction and path the energy source in the additive manufacturing machine moves to solidify a layer of the part. The scan speed refers to the speed with which the energy source moves in the additive manufacturing machine to solidify the part. After the first layer is built, information about the second layer is then transmitted to the additive manufacturing machine, including information regarding … the scan path, and the scan speed. See col. 2 line 62 to col. 3 line 12. In addition, Sharon discloses: The segregated predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 for each of predefined shapes A, B, C, D, E, and F that have been cut into a plurality of layers are stored in library 32 for use in additively manufacturing a part. See col. 3 lines 56-64);
sequentially aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design of the part geometry according to the sequence of one or more datums indicated in the first datum information (e.g., Sharon discloses: Additive manufacturing processes manufacture parts layer-by-layer. See col. 2 lines 58-59. After the first layer is built, information about the second layer is then transmitted to the additive manufacturing machine, including information regarding the scan path, and the scan speed. The machine forms the second layer of the part on the first layer of the part. This process continues, and each successive layer is built upon the previous layer to create a part that has been manufactured layer-by-layer. See col. 3 lines 8-16. In addition, Sharon discloses assembling predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 for each of predefined shapes A, B, C, D, E, and F in library 32 into second model 46 defining the shape of the part, as shown in FIGS. 3 and 5. Library 32 includes predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 that correspond to predefined shapes A, B, C, D, E, and F, respectively. Predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 are CAD models that have been cut into a plurality of layers for use in additively manufacturing a part with the predefined shape A, B, C, D, E, and F, respectively. Predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 also include instructions for a scan path, and a scan speed for the additive manufacturing machine to use during the additive manufacturing process. See col. 3 lines 55-68. As shown in FIG. 4, first model 30 of the part is formed with predefined shapes A and C selected from library 32. As shown in FIG. 3, predefined models 34 and 38 correspond to predefined shapes A and C, respectively. Predefined models 34 and 38 can be pulled from library 32 and joined together to form second model 46 of the part, as shown in FIG. 5. See col. 4 lines 35-40).
Sharon is not specific as to generating a first deviation profile based on the alignment of the aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design of the part geometry according to the sequence of one or more datums indicated in the first datum information; wherein the first deviation profile comprises information indicating or representing a deviation between the electronic design of the part geometry and the first electronic scan mapping of the object; and adjusting the electronic design of the part geometry based on the first deviation profile to compensate for distortion indicated in the first electronic scan mapping.
Sharon, however, describes: When predefined models 34 and 38 are put together to form second model 46, the energy source power level, the scan path, and the scan speed may not be suitable to form a part with minimal to no defects or distortion in area 50 surrounding interface 48 between predefined models 34 and 38. Thus, a simulation can be run in area 50 to determine if there are defects or distortion present in area 50 surrounding interface 48 when the energy source power level, the scan path, and the scan speed for the predefined models are used. Simulating area 50 can include creating a computational model for finite element analysis (FEA) or analytical expressions of area 50. See col. 5 lines 1-12.
Furthermore, Sharon discloses adjusting second model 46 in area 50 surrounding interface 48 to eliminate defects in area 50 surrounding interface 48. As discussed above in reference to step 16, a simulation is run in area 50 surrounding interface 48 to determine if there are any defects or distortion in area 50 surrounding interface 48. If defects or distortion are found, the energy source power level, the scan path, and the scan speed can be adjusted in area 50 surrounding interface 48 in second model 46 as needed to create a part with minimal to no defects or distortion. (22) Step 20 includes additively manufacturing part 52 according to second model 46, as shown in FIG. 7. After second model 46 is deemed to be suitable for additively manufacturing a part with minimal to no defects or distortion, part 52 can be additively manufactured according to second model 46. As shown in FIG. 7, part 52 will have the shape and design of second model 46. (23) Additively manufacturing part 52 according to second model 46 will result in part 52 having minimal to no defects or distortion. See col. 5 lines 13-32.
Thus, considering that Sharon performs analysis on the assembled models forming the parts to test for distortions resulted from the assemblage and adjusts the shapes of the parts accordingly, so that the additively manufactured parts would have a high quality with minimal to no defects or distortion, the Sharon reference obviously encompasses generating a first deviation profile based on the alignment of the aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design of the part geometry according to the sequence of one or more datums indicated in the first datum information; wherein the first deviation profile comprises information indicating or representing a deviation between the electronic design of the part geometry and the first electronic scan mapping of the object; and adjusting the electronic design of the part geometry based on the first deviation profile to compensate for distortion indicated in the first electronic scan mapping, as claimed.
In the alternative, Yang, in a similar art, teaches a method and system for geometrically compensating for the distortions/defects in an additive manufacturing (AM) produced components to allow the construction of more accurate parts. For example, … measurements from the real-life physical model is compared to measurements from a CAD image to determine one or more geometrical differences between the real-life component and the CAD image. If the difference is outside the tolerance threshold a geometric compensation field for the deviation is determined based on high accuracy, high density measurement data (e.g., generating a first deviation profile). The nominal CAD image may then be modified/morphed/deformed by the compensation field, such that the original three-dimensional geometry may be compensated in a global sense before slicing the image into two-dimensional (2D) cross-sections. The 2D cross-sections may subsequently be used to provide the pattern for the laser during the AM process. A real-life physical component may then be produced from the deformed CAD image. In one or more embodiments, a different geometry compensation may be produced for every geometry/design at any three dimensional position on the component based on measurement data, such that the system compensates for errors in the produced component. See para. 17. For example, the measurement data may be a vector field derived from measured errors across a surface of the component, and the deviation may be represented as a set of column vectors. See para. 24.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Sharon with Yang, so as to generate a first deviation profile based on the alignment of the aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design of the part geometry according to the sequence of one or more datums indicated in the first datum information; wherein the first deviation profile comprises information indicating or representing a deviation between the electronic design of the part geometry and the first electronic scan mapping of the object; and adjusting the electronic design of the part geometry based on the first deviation profile to compensate for distortion indicated in the first electronic scan mapping. Such a combination would be advantageous in that it enables the system to geometrically compensate for the distortions/defects in the AM-produced components to allow the construction of more accurate parts. See para. 17 of Yang.
As per claim 2, Sharon discloses the one or more datums of the sequence, the first datum information indicates an associated tolerance of a type including parallelism, perpendicularity, flatness, and true position, concentricity, runout, circularity, straightness, cylindricity, symmetry, and/or angularity tolerance. See col. 3 lines 33-49 in view of col. 4 lines 13-23 of Sharon.
As per claim 3, Sharon discloses performing a tolerance analysis after sequentially aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design of the part geometry, and generating a go-no-go report based on the tolerance analysis as to whether a tolerance was achieved according to the aligned scan mapping. See col. 4 line 30 to col. 5 line 32 Sharon. See also para. 17 of Yang.
As per claims 5-6, Sharon discloses aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the first datum of the first datum information, wherein the first datum information indicates at a least second datum, wherein the first datum precedes the second datum in the sequence of the one or more datums. See col. 3 lines 8-16 and lines 55-68 of Sharon. See also para. 17 of Yang.
As per claims 7-8, Sharon discloses aligning the first electronic scan mapping aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the second datum which is performed after aligning the first electronic scan mapping aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the first datum, wherein aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the second datum is subject to a constraint that the previous alignment of the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the first datum is maintained or is not broken. See col. 2 line 58 to col. 4 line 23, and col. 5 lines 1-26, wherein each of predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 for each of predefined shapes A, B, C, D, E, and F that is stored in library 32 correspond to each of the first, second and third datum, respectively. See also paras. 17-24 of Yang.
As per claims 9-10, Sharon discloses the first datum information indicates at least a third datum, wherein the second datum precedes the third datum in the sequence of the one or more datums of the first datum information, wherein sequentially aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design further comprises aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the third datum which is performed after aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the second datum. See col. 2 line 58 to col. 4 line 23 and col. 5 lines 1-26, wherein each of predefined models 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, and 44 for each of predefined shapes A, B, C, D, E, and F that is stored in library 32 correspond to each of the first, second, third and fourth datum, respectively.
As per claim 11, Sharon discloses the aligning of the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the third datum is subject to a constraint that previous alignments of the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design according to the first and second datums are maintained or are not broken. See col. 2 line 58 to col. 4 line 23 and col. 5 lines 1-26.
As per claim 12, Sharon discloses the first electronic scan mapping comprises a composite of a plurality of scans of multiple instances of the object. Fig. 6 shows a simulation of a model which includes an interface formed of a plurality of predefined models that are adjoined together and use to determine if there are defects in area 50 surrounding interface 48. See col. 4 lines 54-68.
As per claim 13, Sharon, as modified by Yang, discloses generating a compensation profile based on the first deviation profile, the compensation profile indicating compensations to be applied to the electronic design, wherein adjusting the electronic design of the part geometry based on the first deviation profile comprises applying the compensation profile to the electronic design. See col. 5 lines 1-32 of Sharon and paras. 17-24 of Yang.
As per claim 14, Yang, as modified by Sharon, discloses the first deviation profile comprises a 3D representation corresponding to at least one aspect of the object additively manufactured, and wherein the compensation profile comprises a 3D representation corresponding to at least an aspect of the electronic design. See paras. 17 and 21 of Yang and col. 2 lines 57-61 of Sharon and the rationale above with respect to claims 1 and 4 for reason of obviousness.
As per claim 15, Sharon, as modified by Yang, discloses additively manufacturing a further object according to the adjusted design of the part geometry. See col. 5 lines 1-32 of Sharon and para.17 of Yang.
As per claim 16, Sharon, as modified by Yang, discloses obtaining a second datum information indicating a sequence of one or more datums for the part geometry, sequentially aligning the first electronic scan mapping to the electronic design of the part geometry according to the second sequence of one or more datums indicated in the second datum information. See col. 2 line 41 to col. 3 line 30); generating a second deviation profile based on the alignment of the electronic scan mapping to the electronic design of the part geometry, wherein the second deviation profile comprises information indicating or representing a deviation between the electronic design of the part geometry and the first electronic scan mapping of the object; and further adjusting the electronic design of the part geometry based on the second deviation profile (see col. 4 line 9 to col. 5 line 61). See also paras. 26-35 of Yang and the rationale above with respect to claims 1 and 4 for reason of obviousness.
As per claim 17, Yang, as modified by Sharon, discloses the second datum information indicates a sequence of datums that include at least one datum that is difference from at least one of the one or more datums of the first datum information, and wherein the second deviation profile differs from the first deviation profile. See paras. 33-35 of Yang and the rationale above with respect to claims 1 and 4 for reason of obviousness.
As per claim 18, Sharon, as modified by Yang, discloses adjusting the electronic design of the part geometry based on the first deviation profile to compensate for distortion indicated in the first electronic scan mapping comprises adjusting a first portion of the electronic design of the part geometry (see para. 17), and wherein adjusting the electronic design of the part geometry based on the second deviation profile to compensate for distortion indicated in the first electronic scan mapping comprises adjusting a second portion of the electronic design of the part geometry, and
wherein the second portion is different from the first portion of the electronic design of the part geometry (see paras. 29-35).
As per claim 18, Sharon, as modified by Yang, discloses additively manufacturing a further object according to the design of the part geometry adjusted based on the first and second deviation profiles. See col. 5 lines 1-32 of Sharon.
The subject-matters of claim 20 corresponds in terms of a computer-readable medium to that of independent method claim 1. The features of claim 20 are substantially the same as those of claim 1, except the invention category. Accordingly, the same reasonings applied for the rejections of claim 1 also apply to claim 20. In addition, Sharon discloses a non-transitory computer-readable media (78, fig. 8) storing instructions to be executed by at least one processor (70). See fig. 8 and col. 6 lines 1-14.
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Graham et al. (US 9751262) discloses a system for fabricating a component includes an additive manufacturing device and a computing device. The additive manufacturing device is configured to fabricate a first component by sequentially forming a plurality of superposed layers based upon a nominal digital representation of a second component, which includes a plurality of nominal digital two-dimensional cross-sections, each corresponding to a layer of the first component. The computing device includes a processor, wherein for an i.sup.th layer of the first component, the processor is configured to (a) generate a cumulative compensation transformation; (b) apply the cumulative compensation transformation to the nominal digital two-dimensional cross-section corresponding to the i.sup.th layer to create an intermediate digital two-dimensional cross-section corresponding to the i.sup.th layer; (c) determine a local compensation transformation; and (d) apply the local compensation transformation to the intermediate digital two-dimensional cross-section corresponding to the i.sup.th layer.
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WESNER SAJOUS whose telephone number is (571) 272-7791. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10:00 TO 7:30 (ET).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 or email the Examiner directly at wesner.sajous@uspto.gov.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Said Broome can be reached on 571-272-2931. 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. 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. 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.
/WESNER SAJOUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
WS
08/20/2026
Prosecution Insights