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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment and arguments filed on 1/16/26 are acknowledged. Claims 1-14, 16-20, 22-26, and 29 have all been canceled. Claim 21 has been withdrawn. Claim 15 has been amended. Claims 15, 27-28, and 30-37 are pending rejection below.
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.
Claims 15, 27, 28, and 30-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg USPA_20120258256_A1 in view of Hazel WO_2014144189_A1.
1. Regarding Claims 15, 27, 28, and 30-34, Greenberg discloses a coating (Title) as well as a method for applying a coating onto a substrate, such as a workpiece (paragraph 0020), with a non-line-of-sight (NLOS) (Abstract) region as well as a line-of-sight (LOS) region (paragraph 0001) via electron beam physical vapor deposition (EB-PVD) (paragraph 0019). Greenberg discloses that a gas is introduced into the housing by a plurality of nozzles. As the vapor cloud and the gas interact, particle-to-particle collisions cause randomization of the vapor cloud and push the vapor cloud toward the workpiece. Thus, the coating system coats the line of sight regions of the workpiece in the path of the flow of the inert gas. However, non-line of sight area 13 does not obtain the same coverage as the line of sight areas, which are in the direct flow paths of the vapor cloud and inert gas mixture (paragraph 0020), as is being claimed in instant Claims 32 and 33. Moreover, Greenberg discloses that non-line of sight area 13 includes the area between airfoils 12 and inner and outer shrouds 14 and 16 (paragraph 0020), as is being claimed in instant Claim 34. The Examiner respectfully submits that Greenberg further discloses that said workpiece within the chamber is supported by a fixturing system (corresponds to claimed part manipulator of independent Claim 15) (paragraphs 0020, 0024) along with a source (corresponds to claimed ingot) (paragraphs 0020-0024). Moreover, Greenberg discloses that said fixture system may include a series of clamps, screws, and similar structures to secure the workpiece 32 within chamber 24 and can be connected to a movable system that enables shift of the workpiece in any independent direction (paragraph 0026). As such, the Examiner respectfully submits that it would be expected for one of ordinary skill in the art to know how to shift of the workpiece in any direction for coating, including to be centrally position in the cloud, based on end-user specifications of the product, as is being claimed in instant Claim 15.
2. Also, Greenberg discloses use of a multi-airfoil vane (corresponds to claimed vane doublet of claim 31) (paragraphs 0003, 0014, 0018, 0019, Figures), as is being claimed by Applicants in instant Claim 29. Furthermore, Greenberg discloses the NLOS region (element 13 in FIG. 1) to be located adjacent and between two airfoils (element 12 in FIG. 1) while also disclosing that the coating system coats the line of sight regions of the workpiece in the path of the flow of the inert gas, which is the direct flow paths of the vapor cloud and inert gas mixture (paragraph 0020) thereby corresponding to the claimed edges of an airfoil (Figures). Also, Greenberg discloses that the pressure in the deposition chamber can range from 1X10-8 to 101 (kPa) (paragraph 0024) which overlaps with Applicants' claimed range in Claims 15 and 28. Greenberg further discloses that said workpiece within the chamber is supported by a fixturing system (corresponds to claimed part manipulator of independent Claim 15) (paragraphs 0020, 0024) along with a source (corresponds to claimed ingot) (paragraphs 0020-0024). With regards to the claimed ratio of NLOS/LOS in Applicants’ recited in the instant Claims, Greenberg discloses “[i]n some embodiments, vapor cloud modifier 36 may be used to thicken the coating on a non-line of sight or limited line of sight area of workpiece 32, while in alternate embodiments vapor cloud modifier 36 is used to reduce the coating coverage on a line of sight area of workpiece 32.” (paragraph 0027). Although Greenberg does not explicitly disclose the claimed ratio, it does show how different ratios can be obtained and it would be expected for one of ordinary skill in the art to know how to achieve this depending upon end-user product specifications. Likewise, this disclosure also demonstrates that different thicknesses can be obtained in the same manner thereby suggesting Applicants' claimed thicknesses. Therefore, it would be expected for one of ordinary skill in the art to know how to obtain different thicknesses in the respective areas based upon end-user specifications of the product. Applicants have not indicated how the claimed thicknesses impart unexpected and surprising properties.
3. However, Greenberg does not explicitly disclose the claimed voltage for its electron beam.
4. Hazel discloses a deposition method (Title) comprising a chamber and a using electron beam guns (Abstract) to produce TBC coatings on workpieces having LOS and NLOS areas (paragraphs 0003, 0005). Hazel discloses using a voltage ranging from 20-90 kv (paragraphs 0016, 0017). Hazel discloses that TBC deposition at lower vacuum levels (e.g., up to 0.225 Torr (30 Pa), more particularly exemplary ranges of 0.05 20 to 0.225 Torr (6.6 to 30 Pa) or 0.1 to 0.225 Torr (13.3 to 30 Pa)) (paragraphs 0055, 0057, 0065, 0092, 0093, and 0096).
5. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use suitable voltages in the same field of endeavors in the electron beam deposition, of Greenberg, as disclosed by Hazel. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in doing so in order to obtain NLOS and LOS regions using like deposition methods in the art.
6. Regarding Claims 35 and 36, Greenberg in view of Hazel suggests that load-lock chambers can be used wherein heating and cooling of the workpiece can be done (Hazel: paragraph 0044).
7. Regarding Claim 37, Greenberg in view of Hazel suggests maintaining pressure with a pump and a process gas manifold (Hazel: paragraphs 0038, 0085, 0086).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/16/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
1. Applicants state: “Specifically, it is submitted that the ranges recited in claim 1 are critical and are not disclosed in such a manner in the prior art (Greenberg and Hazel) as to make them obvious. As discussed in the Litton Declaration, operating the chamber at a pressure between 4 and 20 Pa and operating the electron laser beam in the range of 40-50 kV produces excellent results as seen in the drawing in the Litton Declaration.”
2. The Examiner respectfully submits that the “Litton Declaration” filed on 12/23/24 states the following:
“16. To summarize, the criticality of combining the accelerating voltage range of 40-50 kV with the chamber pressure range of 4-20 kV is to ensure that the electron beam is accelerated sufficiently to punch through the gas in the chamber, arriving at the ingot with sufficient power to melt the ingot.
17. As the working distance decreases, especially to 0.5 m or below, the efficiency of the ingot melting decreases.”
First, there is no limitation of working distance or “path length” in instant, independent Claim 15. And nor was the Examiner able to find any support for a working distance or path length in the instant Specification. Second, Greenberg recognizes working distance to be critical (paragraphs 0007, 0009, and 0026). Third, the graph presented in the Declaration is from “Electron Beam Technology” by Schiller, which was published in 1982. Thus, it proves that this relationship which Applicants are claimed to be surprising and unexpected was known prior to the filing of the invention.
Finally, the secondary reference, of Hazel, discloses using a voltage ranging from 20-90 kv (paragraphs 0016, 0017) as well as having a pressure that falls into Applicants’ claimed range and overlaps with it (paragraphs 0055, 0057, 0065, 0092, 0093, and 0096). Moreover, Hazel discloses that TBC deposition at lower vacuum levels (e.g., up to 0.225 Torr (30 Pa), more particularly exemplary ranges of 0.05 20 to 0.225 Torr (6.6 to 30 Pa) or 0.1 to 0.225 Torr (13.3 to 30 Pa)) increase vapor molecule collisions in transit from the evaporation source to the part. This means that the vapor cloud produced will enable a higher degree of NLOS deposition than current state of the art EB-PVD processing. Therefore, the remark made by Applicants regarding the claimed pressure to be novel and resulting in unexpected properties is found to be unpersuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TAHSEEN KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1140. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Saturdays 08:00AM-10:00PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 5712701547. 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.
/TAHSEEN KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 April 1, 2026