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)s submitted on 10/04/2024 and 12/17/2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant has been advised to replace “a building platform” in lines 2-3 to -- the building platform --. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 2, 7, 12-15 and 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mochida (US 2020/0039147) in view of Mercelis (US 2016/0303806-of record).
With respect to claim 1, Mochida teaches a method for producing at least one object on a building platform in layers by locally solidifying a pulverulent material in a respective layer (“The laser machining apparatus 1 shown in FIG. 1 is used in the additive manufacturing of the powder bed fusion method, for example. The laser machining apparatus 1 irradiates a laser beam onto the powder bed to melt the powder material of the powder bed, and then allows to solidify and fuse.”, Pa [0021]), the method comprising:
scanning, at least in a plurality of the layers, N high-energy beams at least temporarily simultaneously with N scanners (“the first scanner 21 and second scanner 22”), wherein N≥2, wherein a scanner coordinate system (“first coordinate update unit 161”, “second coordinate update unit 162”, Pa [0030], [0031]) is assigned to each respective scanner (“although the first scanner 21 will be explained, the same also applies to the second scanner 22.”, Pa [0026]; “The first scanner 21 causes the outputted laser beam L to scan the X and Y directions, by changing the rotation angles of each of the mirrors 25, 26 by appropriately controlling the rotational driving of the servomotors 25 a, 26 a based on the drive data from the control device 30. In addition, the first scanner 21 changes the focal point of the outputted laser beam L to the Z direction, by controlling the position of the lens 27, for example, i.e. lens servomotor (not shown), based on the drive data from the control device 30.”, Pa [0028]),
performing, by a control device for an exposure of a respective layer for each scanner (“The first scanner 21 causes the outputted laser beam L to scan the X and Y directions, by changing the rotation angles of each of the mirrors 25, 26 by appropriately controlling the rotational driving of the servomotors 25 a, 26 a based on the drive data from the control device 30. In addition, the first scanner 21 changes the focal point of the outputted laser beam L to the Z direction, by controlling the position of the lens 27, for example, i.e. lens servomotor (not shown), based on the drive data from the control device 30.”, Pa [0028]):
providing exposure data of a machining pattern in a reference coordinate system (“The focal-point coordinate update unit 130 updates the coordinates (XYZ coordinates, machine coordinates) for every predetermined period of the focus (or center) of the laser beam, based on the interpolation data, i.e. the movement amount for every predetermined period.”, Pa [0033]),
converting the exposure data in the reference coordinate system into exposure data in the scanner coordinate system by using a programmed coordinate transformation (“The first kinematics conversion unit 141 performs kinematics conversion based on the coordinates (XYZ coordinates, machine coordinates) for every predetermined period of the focus (or center) of the laser beam and the positional information of the first scanner 21 which is the control target, and generates the angles of the mirrors 25, 26 (i.e. rotational positions of the servomotors 25 a, 26 a) and the position of the converging lens 27 (i.e. rotational position of the servomotor for the converging lens) of the first scanner 21.”, Pa [0034]), and
sending the exposure data in the scanner coordinate system to the associated scanner so that the associated scanner exposes the machining pattern on the building platform in the respective layer (“The first coordinate update unit 161 updates the angles of the mirrors 25, 26 (i.e. rotational positions of the servomotors 25 a, 26 a) and the position of the converging lens 27 (i.e. rotational position of the servomotor for the lens) of the first scanner 21 which were converted by the first kinematics conversion unit 141”, Pa [0039]; “The first servo control unit 171 performs servo control based on the angles of the mirrors 25, 26 (i.e. rotational positions of the servomotors 25 a, 26 a) and the position of the converging lens 27 (i.e. rotational position of the servomotor for the lens) of the first scanner 21 which were updated, and rotationally drives the servomotors 25 a, 26 a of the first scanner 21 and the servomotor for the lens.”, Pa [0041]).
Mochida does not explicitly teach that while producing the at least one object, repeatedly taking measurements to determine current actual coordinate transformations of at least N−1 scanners, wherein between two successive determinations of the current actual coordinate transformations, M layers are produced, wherein M≥2, and while producing the at least one object, updating the programmed coordinate transformations for the at least N−1 scanners, taking into account the current actual coordinate transformations, wherein multiple updates of the programmed coordinate transformations of the at least N−1 scanners are performed between the two successive determinations of the current actual coordinate transformations.
In the same field of endeavor, a device for additive manufacturing, Mercelis teaches that for each sector, a sector coordinate system is associated with the corresponding scan means of this sector, with a relation between this sector coordinate system and a reference coordinate system being determined by an initial transformation function (Pa [0011]), said point of incidence is moved to a least one measuring position with the help of said scan means, in this measuring position, the reference coordinates of the point of incidence are determined in the reference coordinate system (Pa [0012]), for at least one measuring position, the deviation is determined between said reference coordinates of the point of incidence and coordinates of said measuring position in the above-mentioned reference coordinate system which are obtained by applying the initial transformation function on said sector coordinates (Pa [0013]), on the basis of the thus determined deviation for at least one measuring position, and preferably for two, three or more measuring positions, a corrected transformation function is established in such a way that the coordinates of said measuring position in the reference coordinate system are substantially the same as the coordinates obtained by applying the corrected transformation function to the sector coordinates of this measuring position (Pa [0014]), and this method is applied to calibrate the different scan means before the production of the object is started and while the object is being manufactured, thus a calibration according to the method of the invention can take place for example after one or several successive cross-sections of the object have been manufactured (Pa [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mochida with the teachings of Mercelis such that the one would perform determining the deviation between said reference coordinates of the point of incidence and coordinates of said measuring position in the above-mentioned reference coordinate system which are obtained by applying the initial transformation function by measurements and establishing a corrected transformation function after one or several successive cross-sections of the object have been manufactured in order to calibrate the different scan means. Even though Mercelis does not explicitly teach that multiple updates of the programmed coordinate transformations of the at least N−1 scanners are performed between the two successive determinations of the current actual coordinate transformations, one would have found it obvious to perform multiple updates of transformation function for the purpose of the calibration.
With respect to claim 2, Mercelis as applied in the combination regarding claim 1 above teaches after a respective latest determination of the current actual coordinate transformations for a respective one of the at least N−1 scanners, taking into account the current actual coordinate transformation of the latest determination, ascertaining a target coordinate transformation (“a corrected transformation function”), and with the multiple updates of the programmed coordinate transformation between the latest determination and a next determination, transforming the programmed coordinate transformation step-by-step into the target coordinate transformation (“On the basis of this deviation (a,b), a corrected transformation function FC is subsequently calculated for at least one measuring position, and preferably for two, three or more measuring positions, for the scan means of the sector S1. The coordinates of the measuring positions 13 in the reference-coordinate system will then be practically equal to the coordinates obtained by applying the corrected transformation function FC1 to the sector coordinates of these measuring positions.”, Pa [0051]).
With respect to claim 7, Mercelis as applied in the combination regarding claim 1 above teaches/implies that the target coordinate transformation corresponds to the current actual coordinate transformation of the latest determination when there is no deviation.
With respect to claims 12-15, Mercelis as applied in the combination regarding claim 1 above teaches that each of the multiple updates between the two successive determinations is carried out after producing an equal number of layers, each of the multiple updates between the two successive determinations is carried out after producing exactly one layer, the multiple updates between the two successive determinations are distributed evenly over the M layers produced between the two successive determinations, or a value of M of the produced layers between two successive determinations of the current actual coordinate transformations is variable while producing the at least one object (“a calibration according to the method of the invention can take place for example after one or several successive cross-sections of the object have been manufactured.”, Pa [0015]).
With respect to claim 19, Mochida as applied to claim 1 above further teaches that one of the N scanners is selected as a guide scanner (“since the first scanner 21 is installed to be fixed, the positional information is fixed information”, Pa [0034]), the scanner coordinate system of the guide scanner or a coordinate system with a fixed relationship to the scanner coordinate system of the guide scanner is selected as the reference coordinate system (“The focal-point coordinate update unit 130 updates the coordinates (XYZ coordinates, machine coordinates) for every predetermined period of the focus (or center) of the laser beam, based on the interpolation data, i.e. the movement amount for every predetermined period.”, Pa [0033]);“since the first scanner 21 is installed to be fixed, the positional information is fixed information”, Pa [0034]), and Mercelis as applied in the combination teaches that between the two successive determinations of the current actual coordinate transformations, the multiple updates of the programmed coordinate transformations are performed only of the N−1 remaining scanners.
With respect to claim 20, Mochida as applied to claim 1 above further teaches that the reference coordinate system is a machine coordinate system (“the coordinates (XYZ coordinates, machine coordinates)”, Pa [0033]) of a processing machine comprising the N scanners (“a first scanner 21” and “a second scanner 22”, Pa [0022]) and the building platform (“the powder bed”, Pa [0021]), and Mercelis as applied in the combination teaches that the multiple updates of the programmed coordinate transformations of the N scanners are performed between the two successive determinations of the current actual coordinate transformation.
With respect to claim 21, Mercelis as applied in the combination regarding claim 1 above further teaches that the programmed coordinate transformations and the current actual coordinate transformations comprise only displacement information in two orthogonal directions (“Since the deviation of the coordinates according to a vertical direction, in particular according to the direction of the Z-axis, usually is of minor importance compared to the deviation of the coordinates in the build plane 12, only the coordinates according to the X-axis and Y-axis in this build plane 12 will be considered below.”, Pa [0041]).
With respect to claim 22, Mercelis as applied in the combination regarding claim 1 above further teaches that the programmed coordinate transformations and the current actual coordinate transformations comprise displacement information in two orthogonal directions (“Since the deviation of the coordinates according to a vertical direction, in particular according to the direction of the Z-axis, usually is of minor importance compared to the deviation of the coordinates in the build plane 12, only the coordinates according to the X-axis and Y-axis in this build plane 12 will be considered below.”, Pa [0041]) and Mochida as applied to claim 1 above further teaches rotation information in a plane spanned by the two orthogonal directions (“the angles of the mirrors 25, 26 (i.e. rotational positions of the servomotors 25 a, 26 a) and the position of the converging lens 27 (i.e. rotational position of the servomotor for the converging lens) of the first scanner 21.”, Pa [0034]).
With respect to claim 23, the combination as applied to claim 1 above teaches a system for producing at least one object on a building platform in layers by locally solidifying a pulverulent material in a respective layer (“The laser machining apparatus 1 shown in FIG. 1 is used in the additive manufacturing of the powder bed fusion method, for example. The laser machining apparatus 1 irradiates a laser beam onto the powder bed to melt the powder material of the powder bed, and then allows to solidify and fuse.”, Mochida, Pa [0021]), the system comprising a building platform (“the powder bed”), N scanners, wherein N≥2 (“the first scanner 21 and second scanner 22”), and a control device (“control device 30”), configured to carry out a method according to claim 1 (See the rejection of claim 1 above).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mochida (US 2020/0039147) in view of Mercelis (US 2016/0303806-of record) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Schautt et al. (US 2017/0129106).
With respect to claim 24, the combination as applied to claim 1 above teaches a system for producing at least one object on a building platform in layers by locally solidifying a pulverulent material in a respective layer (“The laser machining apparatus 1 shown in FIG. 1 is used in the additive manufacturing of the powder bed fusion method, for example. The laser machining apparatus 1 irradiates a laser beam onto the powder bed to melt the powder material of the powder bed, and then allows to solidify and fuse.”, Mochida, Pa [0021]), and the method according to claim 1 (See the rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly teach a non-transitory computer-readable medium with a program code stored thereon, the program code, when executed by the system, causing the method.
Schautt relates to a method for handling an object, and teaches a computer program product with program code means which enable a computer to carry out the method (Pa [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mochida in view of Mercelis with the teachings of Schautt provide a computer program product with program code means with the system in order to enable the system to carry out the method.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 8-11 and 16-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 3, the prior art (Mercelis, US 2016/0303806), which is cited in the rejection above, does not teach or suggest after the respective latest determination of the current actual coordinate transformations for the respective one of the at least N−1 scanners, ascertaining an initial deviation between the target coordinate transformation and the programmed coordinate transformation, on which the latest determination was based, and dividing the ascertained initial deviation into multiple deviation portions, and for the layers which are produced after the latest determination until the next determination of the current actual coordinate transformation, changing the programmed coordinate transformation step-by-step in the multiple updates, wherein with each update, a further deviation portion is added to the programmed coordinate transformation last applied by the control device.
With respect to claim 8, the prior art (Mercelis, US 2016/0303806), which is cited in the rejection above, does not teach or suggest that the target coordinate transformation is ascertained as a predicted coordinate transformation taking into account the current actual coordinate transformations of the latest determination and at least D previously determined current actual coordinate transformations, wherein D≥2.
With respect to claim 16, the prior art (Mercelis, US 2016/0303806), which is cited in the rejection above, does not teach or suggest that the value of M of the produced layers or a moving average of the value of M of the produced layers is selected to be lower at a beginning of the production of the at least one object in layers than in a further course of the production of the at least one object in layers.
With respect to claim 17, the prior art (Mercelis, US 2016/0303806), which is cited in the rejection above, does not teach or suggest that the value of M of the layers to be produced between a latest determination and a next determination of the current actual coordinate transformation is selected depending on how large a neighbor deviation between the current actual coordinate transformation of the latest determination and the current actual coordinate transformation of a determination preceding the latest determination is for each of the at least N−1 scanners.
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