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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because a patent abstract should be a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art. For a process, the abstract should include steps. In this case, the abstract refers to purported merits or speculative applications and describes an apparatus that does not clearly relate to the presently claimed method. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 6 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites abbreviated terms (“AM,” “DED,” “PBF”) without first identifying the full words or phrases. The claims should first introduce the full terminology prior to referencing the shortened forms.
Claim 2, in the last line, should read “and re-solidifying the surface,” or similar.
Claim 6, between lines 2 and 3, should read, “and the method further comprises…” or “and the step of fabricating an inner portion of the contour by PBF further comprises…” or similar.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding the abbreviated claim terms, “AM” is interpreted to mean “additive manufacturing,” “DED” is interpreted to mean “direct energy deposition,” and “PBF” is interpreted to mean “powder bed fusion.” The specification describes that DED is a known technique to carry out fabrication by melting and solidifying a metal material together with a base material using an appropriate heat source while supplying the metal material locally, whereas PBF involves each layer of a 3D object being fabricated by powder deposition over a surface and irradiation of a portion to be fabricated by a laser or electron beam to cause melting and solidifying or sintering of the powder ([0002]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/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 2 recites the limitation "the fabricated fabrication object" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, claim 1 recites two fabrication steps, “fabricating a contour” and “fabricating an inner portion,” and does not clearly associate either or both of these steps with a fabricated fabrication object.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the fabrication" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As noted above, claim 1 recites two different “fabricating” steps. Note that claim 4 depends from claim 3 and also recites “the fabrication” in lines 3 and 4.
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 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lan et al., US 20190381603 A1, in view of Feldmann et al., US 20190299286 A1, both provided in Applicant’s IDS.
Regarding claim 1, Lan discloses a method for manufacturing a fabrication object according to an AM technique (part 300 manufactured using a hybrid additive manufacturing method, Fig. 4, [0039]), the method comprising the steps of:
Fabricating a contour (external shell 310, Fig. 4, [0039]) of a fabrication target (of part 300, Fig. 4) by DED (the external structure is manufactured by an EBM process, [0044]; EBM is a direct deposition process, [0029], or DED); and
Fabricating an inner portion of the contour (internal structure 320, Fig. 4, [0039]) by PBF (the internal structure is manufactured by SLM, [0042]; SLM is a PBF technique, [0028]);
The step of fabricating the inner portion of the contour comprising: supplying a powder material to the inner portion of the contour (SLM comprises successively applying thin layers of powder, [0002]); and irradiating the powder material supplied to the inner portion of the contour with a beam (application of a laser to melt and fuse each powder layer, [0002]).
Lan discloses the SLM process used to fabricate the inner portion includes application of a laser beam to the powder material forming the inner portion (the inner portion is formed by SLM, [0042]; SLM involves laser application to the powder layer for melting/fusing, [0002]). Lan is silent as to rectangularly condensing the beam on the supplied powder material.
In the analogous art, Feldmann discloses additive manufacturing by selective laser melting ([0033]). Feldmann teaches condensing the beam on the powder layer to have a rectangular beam shape which has a uniform power density such that the resulting power profile is substantially uniform ([0060]) and the uniform power exposure can produce high quality fused material tracks, reduce melt pool instability, and allow for greater processing speeds, higher power densities, and a wider process window ([0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lan to specify the beam was rectangularly condensed on the powder material supplied to the inner portion of the contour so that the inner portion made by PBF could be formed using a beam with a uniform power profile and thereby achieve high quality fused material tracks and enable a wider processing window, as taught by Feldmann.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lan et al., US 20190381603 A1, in view of Feldmann et al., US 20190299286 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jonsson et al., US 20120138258 A1.
Regarding claim 2, modified Lan discloses the method of claim 1. Lan does not disclose a step of re-melting a surface of the fabricated fabrication object [any surface fabricated by the method of claim 1] and resolidifying it [the surface].
In the analogous art, Jonsson discloses additive manufacturing of a part ([0010], [0012]) and subsequently re-melting at least part of an outer surface of the part ([0012]) to improve its surface smoothness and thereby reduce the risk of fatigue failure in operation, as well as to improve the microstructure of the part and thereby improve its mechanical properties ([0012]-[0013]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lan to include a step of re-melting a surface of the fabricated fabrication object and resolidifying it in order to achieve a smooth surface and improved microstructure with corresponding improved fatigue and mechanical properties, as taught by Jonsson.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lan et al., US 20190381603 A1, in view of Feldmann et al., US 20190299286 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hyde et al., US 20150064047 A1, provided in Applicant’s IDS.
Regarding claim 3, modified Lan discloses the method of claim 1. Lan is silent as to a step of controlling a temperature of the fabrication object during the fabrication.
In the analogous art, Hyde discloses a method of additive manufacturing (Abstract) including controlling a temperature of the fabrication object during the fabrication (material at the printing site 60 is locally cooled in a controlled manner, [0037]-[0041], cooling based on feedback data from sensor, [0041]). Hyde teaches that local controlled cooling allows for the controlled formation of a desired microstructure ([0037]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lan to include a step of controlling a temperature of the fabrication object during the fabrication in order to control the formation of a desired microstructure of the finished part, as taught by Hyde.
Regarding claim 4, modified Lan discloses the method of claim 3, and the combination further discloses the step of controlling the temperature includes steps of measuring a surface temperature of the fabrication object during the fabrication (Hyde: sensor monitoring the temperature of the printing site, [0051]), and cooling a fabricated portion during the fabrication (Hyde: material at the printing site 60 is locally cooled in a controlled manner, [0037]-[0041]).
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lan et al., US 20190381603 A1, in view of Feldmann et al., US 20190299286 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Madinger et al., US 20200307107 A1, provided in Applicant’s IDS.
Regarding claim 5, modified Lan discloses the method of claim 1. Lan does not disclose the step of fabricating an inner portion of the contour by PBF comprises a step of disposing a bridge plate at the inner portion of the contour.
In the analogous art, Madinger discloses additive manufacturing of a component by powder bed fusion (Fig. 1A, [0014]) including a step of disposing a bridge plate at the component (any of inserts 20, 22A/B; or inserts 22A/B and corresponding support structures 30A/B, Figs. 1A-1D, [0013]-[0014], [0018]-[0019]). Madinger teaches that the building of components on inserts, i.e., bridge plates, on a build plate increases efficiency because once a component is complete the component and insert can be removed with minimal downtime ([0010]-[0011]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fabricating by PBF step of Lan to include a step of disposing a bridge plate at the inner portion of the contour in order to provide the capability of building the inner portion on an easily separable and replaceable insert to facilitate its subsequent removal and post-processing, as taught by Madinger.
Regarding claim 6, modified Lan discloses the method of claim 5, and the combination further discloses the bridge plate comprises a cooling device (Madinger: inserts are cooled by cooling source 38 and thus have a cooling device, Fig. 1A, [0013]). The combination as set forth above does not specifically disclose [the method / the step of fabricating an inner portion] further comprises a step of cooling the fabrication object by the cooling device of the bridge plate. However, Madinger further teaches cooling by the cooling source of the inserts which contact the fabrication object, also causing cooling of the fabrication object, which can facilitate subsequent separation of inserts from the build plate and from each other ([0030]). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further specify a step of cooling the fabrication object by the cooling device of the bridge plate in the process of facilitating subsequent separation of the parts, as taught by Madinger.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20180214948 A1 (Fig. 8) and US 20180200795 A1 (Fig. 5), Morimoto et al. disclose the formation of solidified layers by hybrid AM including PBF and DED.
US 20180236552 A1, Basini discloses manufacturing a part using two additive manufacturing techniques including laser deposition in line with DED and powder bed fusion ([0019]-[0020]).
WO 2017153313 A1, Brunhuber et al. discloses additive manufacturing by an apparatus configured for selective laser melting and laser metal deposition.
US 20180200790 A1, Hart et al. disclose relevant temperature control and cooling systems for powder bed fusion (Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER L GROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am - 5pm 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.
/J.L.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754