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 and Application
This final action on the merits is in response to the remarks and amendment received by the office on 01 July 2026. Claims 1-18 are pending. Claims 1, 4, 5, and 9 are amended. Claims 16-18 are newly added. No claims are cancelled.
Response to Amendment
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-11, and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0182472 to Satoshi Kitaoka, made of record per applicant disclosure (‘472 hereafter) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0020920 to Kumagai et al. (‘920 hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, ‘472 teaches three-dimensional object printing apparatus comprising: a movement mechanism that includes a carriage moving along a first axis (Fig 1B items 103 and 101); a head that ejects a liquid toward a workpiece (Fig 1B item 300); a first lifting and lowering mechanism that is supported by the carriage, and lifts and lowers the head along a second axis intersecting the first axis (Fig 1B item 93); a first shielding plate that is supported by the carriage, is disposed at a position next to the head in a direction along the first axis, and shields the head (Fig 2 item 7L); a second lifting and lowering mechanism that is supported by the carriage, the second lifting and lowering mechanism being configured to lift and lower the first light shielding plate along the second axis (Fig. 1B item 92); and a first detection portion that detects contact with the workpiece based on contact between the first light shielding plate and the workpiece (Paragraph 0058). ‘472 does not teach irradiation.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘920 teaches a first irradiation portion that is supported by the carriage, and irradiates the workpiece with light curing the liquid ejected from the head (Fig 1 item 50); a first light shielding plate that is supported by the carriage, is disposed at a position between the head and the first irradiation portion in a direction along the first axis, and shields light travelling from the first irradiation portion toward the head (Fig 1 item 50) for the benefit of curing the jetted material. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘472 with those of ‘920 for the benefit of providing collision detection and avoidance to a curing additive manufacturing apparatus.
Regarding claim 2, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus further comprising: a second detection portion that is supported by the carriage, is disposed at a position opposite to a position where the first light shielding plate is disposed with respect to the head in the direction along the first axis, and detects contact with the workpiece (Fig 2 items 7L and 7R).
Regarding claim 4, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus further comprising: and a control portion that controls operations of the first lifting and lowering mechanism and the second lifting and lowering mechanism, wherein the second axis is an axis along a vertical direction, and when the first irradiation portion irradiates liquid on the workpiece with light, the control portion positions a lower end of the first light shielding plate in the vertical direction at the same position as a lower end of the head in the vertical direction or at a lower position in the vertical direction (paragraph 0054).
Regarding claim 5, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein the second axis is an axis along a vertical direction, and when the first irradiation portion irradiates liquid on the workpiece with light, a lower end of the first light shielding plate is positioned in the vertical direction at the same position as a lower end of the head in the vertical direction or at a lower position in the vertical direction (Fig 1 item 92).
Regarding claim 6, ‘472 does not teach irradiation portions.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein in a direction along a third axis intersecting the first axis and the second axis, a length of an irradiation surface of the first irradiation portion from one end to another end is equal to or longer than a length of the head from one end to another end, and a length of the first light shielding plate from one end to another end is equal to or longer than the length of the head from the one end to the other end (Paragraph 0080) for the benefit of curing the jetted material. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘472 with those of ‘920 for the benefit of providing collision detection and avoidance to a curing additive manufacturing apparatus.
Regarding claim 7, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein the first light shielding plate includes a first light shielding portion, and a second light shielding portion that is provided below the first light shielding portion in the vertical direction, and includes the lower end of the first light shielding plate in the vertical direction, and in the direction along the third axis, a length of the first light shielding portion from one end to another end is equal to or longer than the length of the irradiation surface of the first irradiation portion from the one end to the other end, and a length of the second light shielding portion from one end to another end is shorter than the length of the first light shielding portion from the one end to the other end and is equal to or longer than the length of the head from the one end to the other end (Fig 2 item 7R).
Regarding claim 8, ‘472 does not teach irradiation.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘920 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein in the direction along the first axis, a length between the head and the first light shielding plate is equal to or longer than a length between the first irradiation portion and the first light shielding plate (paragraph 0080) for the benefit of curing the jetted material. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘472 with those of ‘920 for the benefit of providing collision detection and avoidance to a curing additive manufacturing apparatus.
Regarding claim 9, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus further comprising: a control portion that controls operations of the first lifting and lowering mechanism and the second lifting and lowering mechanism, wherein the second axis is an axis along a vertical direction, and when the first light shielding plate is scanned along the workpiece, the control portion positions a lower end of the first light shielding plate in the vertical direction at the same position as a lower end of the head in the vertical direction or at a lower position in the vertical direction (paragraph 0054).
Regarding claim 10, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein the first light shielding plate is fixed to the second lifting and lowering mechanism via an elastic member having elasticity, and the lower end of the first light shielding plate in the vertical direction is a free end (Fig 2 item 7L and paragraph 0057).
Regarding claim 11, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein in the direction along the first axis, a length between the head and the first light shielding plate is longer than a movement distance required until the carriage is stopped after detecting contact between the workpiece and the first light shielding plate based on a detection result of the first detection portion (paragraph 0059 and 0060).
Regarding claim 14, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus further comprising: a control portion that controls an operation of the movement mechanism, wherein the control portion executes a preliminary operation of moving the first light shielding plate along the workpiece in a state where the head does not eject liquid, before executing a printing operation in which the head ejects the liquid (paragraph 0059 and 0060).
Regarding claim 15, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus further comprising: a head control portion that controls driving of the head, wherein the head control portion executes thick printing of ejecting the liquid from the head toward a position overlapping at least a part of the liquid on the workpiece (paragraph 0075).
Regarding claim 16, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus further comprising: a control portion that controls operations of the first lifting and lowering mechanism and the second lifting and lowering mechanism, wherein the control portion changes a relative position between the head and the first light shielding plate along the second axis between a printing operation in which the head ejects the liquid and a curing operation in which the first irradiation portion irradiates the liquid on the workpiece insofar as this limitation is a recitation of intended use of the claimed apparatus and the prior art device teaches that the two z-axis drivers are independently controllable to move the light shields and head independent of each other (Fig 8).
Regarding claim 17, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein in the curing operation, the control portion positions a lower end of the first light shielding plate in a vertical direction at the same position as a lower end of the head in the vertical direction or at a lower position in the vertical direction insofar as this limitation is a recitation of intended use of the claimed apparatus and the prior art device teaches that the two z-axis drivers are independently controllable to move the light shields and head independent of each other (Fig 8).
Regarding claim 18, ‘472 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein in the printing operation, the control portion positions the first light shielding plate at a position farther from the workpiece than the head along the second axis, and in the curing operation, the control portion positions a lower end of the first light shielding plate at the same position as a lower end of the head or at a position closer to the workpiece than the lower end of the head along the second axis insofar as this limitation is a recitation of intended use of the claimed apparatus and the prior art device teaches that the two z-axis drivers are independently controllable to move the light shields and head independent of each other (Fig 8).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘472 in view of ‘920 as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0001505 to Hakkaku et al. (‘505 hereafter).
Regarding claim 3, ‘472 teaches a second light shielding plate that is disposed at a position between the head and the second irradiation portion in the direction along the first axis, and shields light travelling from the second irradiation portion toward the head, wherein the second detection portion detects the contact with the workpiece based on contact between the second light shielding plate and the workpiece. (Fig items 7L and 7R). ‘472 in view of ‘920 does not teach a second irradiation portion.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘505 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus further comprising: a second irradiation portion that is disposed at a position opposite to a position where the first light shielding plate is disposed with respect to the head in the direction along the first axis, and that irradiates the workpiece with light curing the liquid ejected from the head (Fig 1A items UV1 and UV2) for the benefit of enabling bidirection layer building. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘472 in view of ‘920 with those of ‘505 for the benefit of enabling bidirection layer building with collision avoidance.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘472 in view of ‘920 as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0109495 to Macy et al. (‘495 hereafter).
Regarding claim 12, ‘472 in view of ‘920 does not teach a needle-body.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein the first detection portion includes a needle-shaped body that has a tip end coming into contact with the first light shielding plate, and a sensor that detects displacement of the tip end (Fig 3 items 302, 304 and 306) for the benefit of determining the position of the carriage with respect to a build surface. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘472 in view of ‘920 with those of ‘495 for the benefit of determining the relative positions of the carriage and build surface.
Regarding claim 13, ‘495 teaches the three-dimensional object printing apparatus wherein the first detection portion is configured to detect whether or not the displacement of the tip end from a natural state is equal to or longer than a predetermined distance by the sensor, and the needle-shaped body comes into contact with the first light shielding plate in a state where the tip end is initially displaced to reduce the predetermined distance (Fig 3 items 302, 304 and 306) for the benefit of determining the position of the carriage with respect to a build surface. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘472 in view of ‘920 with those of ‘495 for the benefit of determining the relative positions of the carriage and build surface.
Response to Arguments
In support of the patentability of the instant claims, applicant argues that the previously and above applied prior art does not teach the claims as amended. Examiner is not persuaded. The previously applied prior art teaches that the prior art Z-axis driver does move the light shield relative to the carriage. Applicant should note well that examiner has not cited prior art carriage (item 1, various figures in ‘472) against the claimed carriage. Rather examiner equates the structure which holds the prior art carriage assembly on the X-axis and/or Y-axis traversal rails as being the prior art carriage.
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 John P Robitaille whose telephone number is (571)270-7006. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at (571) 270-5516. 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.
/JPR/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights