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 .
Claims 1-11 are pending.
Claims 1-11 are rejected below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the generated further deviations " in line 22.
In the same claim in line 29 “the ascertained first or further deviation” is recited.
There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. None of the dependent claims remedy these issues and are rejected for the same reason.
In claim 4, further deviations seems to be being defined again in line 2. If this is the same further deviations it should state “the further deviations” if it is a new term it needs to be defined with a new name so as to be distinguishable from the further deviations defined in claim 1. In line 7 “a single deviation” seems to be being defined. It is unclear if this is part of the further deviations of claim 1 or a new deviations being defined.
Claim 6, similar to claim 4 seems to missing “the” before further deviations. Also, the further deviations are not ascertained, however, the first deviations are. So, the “wherein the ascertaining of further deviations” is confusing. Applicant may want to add to term ascertaining to the completion step of claim 1.
Claim 11 states “again to ascertain first and further deviations” It is unclear if these are new deviations since it does not state “again to ascertain the first and further deviations”.
Other art of record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
De Souza Borges Ferreira (U.S. PG Pub. 2019/0346830) teaches an automated geometric shape deviation modeling.
Yang (U.S. PG Pub. 2017/0368753) teaches system and method for distortion mitigation and compensation in additive manufacturing.
Catana Salazar (U.S. PG Pub. 2023/0029302) teaches object deformation determination.
Huang (U.S. PG Pub. 2016/0299996) teaches comparing the data to find shape deviations for the standard calibration parts in a coordinate system; generating a model of functional dependence of scanning error for the 3D scanner using the shape deviations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Furthermore, the reason for allowance is that none of the found prior art teach these being mapped in a model having one or more unscanned regions; determining, in a projection step, first deviations between corresponding points P and P′ in the scanned regions, wherein the point P is respectively located on a surface of the target geometry of the 3D structure and the associated point P′ is respectively located on the model of the surface of the scanned actual geometry of the 3D structure; storing these ascertained first deviations, with their value, as deviation data in relation to associated points P.sub.1, P.sub.2, P.sub.3, . . . , P.sub.n of the data regarding the target geometry of the 3D structure; completing, in a completion step, further deviations belonging to the unscanned regions of the surface of the created 3D structure using the data regarding the target geometry of the 3D structure and the already ascertained first deviation data, wherein the generated further deviation data in relation to associated points P.sub.1, P.sub.2, P.sub.3, . . . , P.sub.n of the data regarding the target geometry of the 3D structure are stored with their value, and wherein deviation data completed in this way are generated; and generating, in a deformation step, corrected 3D print data, in which points P.sub.1, P.sub.2, P.sub.3, . . . , P.sub.n of the data regarding the target geometry of the 3D structure are displaced by a magnitude, dependent on the first or further deviation, of the stored value in a direction opposite the ascertained first or further deviation on the basis of the stored first or further deviation ascertained in relation to the respective point P.sub.1, P.sub.2, P.sub.3, . . . , P.sub.n, wherein the corrected 3D print data are used to control the creation of subsequent 3D structures in a 3D printing process.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN L LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1042. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4PM.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at 571-272-4105. 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.
/NATHAN L LAUGHLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights