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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/11/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment submitted 11/11/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 8-11, 13-17, and 21-25 remain pending. Claims 6-7, 12, and 18-20 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/11/2025 have been fully considered and were found persuasive except for Applicant’s arguments as described below. The amendments to the claims have changed the scope of the claims necessitating new and modified grounds of rejection. Please see new and modified grounds of rejection below.
The Applicant argues the prior art does not teach “wherein the attachment preform has a triangular cross-sectional geometry” since US 10180071 to Freeman (henceforth referred to as Freeman ‘071) teaches an attachment preform having “a pentagonal shape”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The rejection makes clear that a triangular shape is disclosed by Freeman ‘917 (and Vetters) and it is said triangular shape which is being modified, i.e. the rejection does not require incorporation of any shape taught by Freeman ‘071.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-11, 13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10787917 to Freeman (henceforth referred to as Freeman ‘917) in view of US 10577939 to Vetters, US 10710317 to Rice, and US 10180071 to Freeman (henceforth referred to as Freeman ‘071).
(a) Regarding claim 1:
(i) Freeman ‘917 discloses an apparatus for a rotor assembly with a rotational axis (), the apparatus comprising:
a first rotor disk (fore disk segment 26, Figs 2-3) comprising a first disk pocket (slots 34, Figs 2-3),
the first disk pocket disposed at an outer distal end of the first rotor disk and extends axially and radially into the first rotor disk (Figs 2-3), and the first disk pocket having a triangular cross-sectional geometry (Fig 2, i.e. conforming to triangular cross-sectional geometry of root 86 as shown in Fig 4),
a second rotor disk (aft disk segment 28, Figs 2-3) comprising a second disk pocket (slots 42, Fig 3),
the second disk pocket disposed at an outer distal end of the second rotor disk and extends axially and radially into the second rotor disk (Fig 3), and the second disk pocket having a triangular cross-sectional geometry (Fig 2, i.e. conforming to triangular cross-sectional geometry of root 86 as shown in Fig 4);
a rotor blade (turbine blade 24, Fig 4) including an airfoil (88, Fig 4), a neck (thinned portion between root 86 and airfoil 88, Fig 4) and an attachment (root 86, Fig 4), the neck radially connecting the airfoil and the attachment (Fig 4);
the attachment extending axially between an attachment first axial side and an attachment second axial side (axially fore and aft ends of root 86, Fig 4),
a first end portion of the attachment projecting axially to the attachment first axial side (end portion defining surface of attachment at first axial side) and having a triangular cross-sectional geometry (Figs 2/4), and
a second end portion of the attachment projecting axially to the second axial side (end portion defining surface of attachment at second axial side) and having a triangular cross-sectional geometry (Figs 2/4),
the attachment having an attachment bottom surface extending between the attachment first axial side and the attachment second axial side (bottom surface of root 86, Fig 4),
the attachment bottom surface generally opposite to the neck (Fig 4);
wherein the rotor blade is axially disposed between first rotor disk and the second rotor disk (Fig 2) and is mated with the first rotor disk and the second rotor disk (Fig 2) such that the first end portion of the attachment projects axially into the first disk pocket and the second end portion of the attachment projects axially into the second disk pocket (Fig 2; Col 6 Lns 4-8/59-63).
(ii) Freeman ‘917 does not disclose
a sheet of material forming a portion of the attachment, a portion of the neck, and a portion of the airfoil;
a second sheet of material wrapped over the sheet of material to form a second portion of the attachment including the attachment first axial side, the attachment second axial side, and the attachment bottom surface, a portion of the neck, and a portion of a platform of the rotor blade,
the second sheet of material comprising woven material or braided material;
the second sheet of material wrapped about the sheet of material.
(iii) Vetters is also in the field of rotor assemblies with a rotational axis (Col 4 Lns 9-10), and teaches a rotor blade (CMC blade 210, Fig 4) comprising:
a sheet of material (first portion 248 and second portion 250 of core 218, Fig 4) forming a portion of the attachment, a portion of the neck, and a portion of the airfoil (Fig 4);
a second sheet of material (wrap 220) wrapped over the sheet of material to form a second portion of the attachment including the attachment first axial side (Col 6 Lns 19-22), the attachment second axial side (Col 6 Lns 19-22), and the attachment bottom surface (Fig 4), a portion of the neck (Fig 4), and a portion of a platform (platform 214, Fig 4) of the rotor blade,
the second sheet of material comprising woven material or braided material (wrap 20/220 has 3D weave, Col 13 Lns 52-55; “woven/braided CMC airfoil”, Col 14 Lns 35-37; woven/braided CMC, Col 15 Ln 39);
the second sheet of material wrapped about the sheet of material (Fig 4).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rotor blade as disclosed by Freeman ‘917 with the above aforementioned sheet of material and second sheet of material as taught by Vetters for the purpose of carrying centripetal loads and enabling complex geometry associated with the root and the platform (Col 6 Lns 25-33).
(v) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters does not explicitly teach:
the first end portion of the attachment projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment first axial side, and the second end portion of the attachment projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment second axial side;
an attachment preform configured to form the base of the attachment, the attachment preform projecting axially into and partially forming the first end portion of the attachment, and the attachment preform projecting axially into and partially forming the second end portion of the attachment, the attachment preform partially forming the attachment bottom surface, wherein a length of the attachment preform is at least 95% of a length of the attachment;
the sheet of material wrapped about the attachment preform, nor
the second sheet of material wrapped about the attachment preform.
(vi) Rice is also in the field of rotor assemblies (see title) and teaches a rotor blade (blade assembly 602/802) comprising:
a neck (portion of base 612/836 between forward and aft channels 628/630/828/830, Figs 6A-9) and an attachment (radially innermost portion of base 612/836 comprising base tangs 624/626/824/826, Figs 6A-9),
the attachment extending axially between an attachment first axial side (one of axially forward and aft sides of respective forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826) and an attachment second axial side (the other of axially forward and aft sides of respective forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826),
a first end portion of the attachment (respective one of forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826) projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment first axial side (Figs 6A-9), and
a second end portion of the attachment (respective other of forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826) projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment second axial side (Figs 6A-9).
(vii) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the attachment as taught by Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters with the above aforementioned first and second end portions extending axially from the neck as taught by Rice for the purpose of allowing for the use of supportive structures (end caps 606/608, forward and aft rings 850/852) supporting exchanging loads between the blade and a rotor (Col 9 Lns 38-39/61-64).
(viii) Freeman ‘071 is also in the field of rotor blades (see title) and teaches:
a rotor blade (200/410/510) comprising an airfoil (216/416/516), a neck (stem 220/420/520, Figs 6/8/11), and an attachment (root core 222/422/522 and root casing 224/424/524), the attachment having an attachment bottom surface (bottom surface of attachment, Figs 6/8/11);
an attachment preform (plies 246/446/546 and 248/548, Figs 6/8/11) configured to form a base of the attachment (Figs 6/8/11),
the attachment preform projecting axially into and partially forming a first end portion of the attachment (Figs 5-6/8-9), and
the attachment preform projecting axially into and partially forming a second end portion of the attachment (Figs 5-6/8-9),
the attachment preform partially forming the attachment bottom surface (Figs 6/8/11),
wherein a length of the attachment preform is at least 95% of a length of the attachment (root cores 222/422 reasonably disclosed in Figs 4-5/9 as extending the entire length of the root); and
a sheet of material (ply 242/442/542) wrapped about the attachment preform to form a portion of the attachment, a portion of the neck, and a portion of the airfoil (Figs 6/8/11).
(ix) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sheet of material as taught by Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice with the above aforementioned sheet of material and attachment preform as taught by Freeman ‘071 for the purpose of maintaining the shape of the root by distributing the load placed upon the root as hoop stress (Col 9 Lns 56-67).
(x) The Examiner notes that the attachment of Freeman ‘917 has a triangular cross-sectional geometry and that when modified as described above the attachment preform would have a triangular cross-sectional geometry as the attachment is reasonably disclosed by Freeman ‘071 in Figures 6/8/11 as conforming to the shape of the attachment.
(xi) The Examiner further notes that, as the second sheet of material wraps around the first sheet about the attachment/neck as disclosed by Vetters, the second sheet of material of Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 would also be wrapped about the attachment preform.
(b) Regarding claim 2:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 further teaches wherein the first end portion of the attachment is configured as a first cantilevered projection (Rice: Figs 6A-9); and the second end portion of the attachment is configured as a second cantilevered projection (Rice: Figs 6A-9).
(c) Regarding claim 3:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 further teaches wherein:
the rotor blade further includes a platform (Vetters: platform 214; Rice: platform 622);
a first gap (Rice: respective one of forward and aft channels 628/630/828/830, Figs 6A-9), located axially adjacent the neck, extends radially between the first end portion of the attachment and the platform (Rice: Figs 6A-9); and
a second gap (Rice: respective other of forward and aft channels 628/630/828/830, Figs 6A-9), located axially adjacent the neck, extends radially between the second end portion of the attachment and the platform (Rice: Figs 6A-9).
(d) Regarding claims 4-5:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 further teaches:
wherein the rotor blade comprises ceramic (Vetters: see title/abstract); and
wherein the rotor blade comprises metal (Freeman ‘071: attachment preform may be filled with metallic retention pin 582, projecting axially fore and aft of the neck as taught by Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071, to secure the blade to a rotor, Figs 10-13).
(e) Regarding claim 8:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 further teaches wherein the attachment preform has a triangular cross-sectional geometry (Vetters: root portion has triangular shape, Fig 4; Freeman ‘071: tapering section of attachment preform, Figs 6/8).
(f) Regarding claims 9 & 10:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 further teaches:
wherein the attachment preform is a tubular attachment preform (Freeman ‘071: Col 9 Lns 23-24; Col 16 Lns 40-41); and
wherein the attachment preform comprises an outer shell (Freeman ‘071: plies 246/248/546/548) surrounding filler material (Freeman ‘071: filler 254 or retention pin 582, Col 9 Lns 27-30 and Col 16 Lns 50-51, Figs 6/11).
(g) Regarding claim 11:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 further teaches wherein opposing distal ends (Freeman ‘071: ends 262/264/462/464/562/564) of the sheet of material are located at a tip of the airfoil (Freeman ‘071: Figs 6/8/11).
(h) Regarding claim 13:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Vetters further teaches wherein opposing distal ends of the second sheet of material (first and second strips 236 and 242) are located at opposing lateral ends of the platform (Fig 4).
(i) Regarding claim 16:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 further teaches wherein the rotor blade is configured with an internal cooling passage (Vetters: “hollow cavity”, Col 5 Lns 35-37; Freeman ‘071: Col 15 Lns 3-16, Figs 8-9).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10787917 to Freeman (henceforth referred to as Freeman ‘917) in view of US 10577939 to Vetters, US 10710317 to Rice, and US 10180071 to Freeman (henceforth referred to as Freeman ‘071) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 10202853 to Kleinow.
(a) Regarding claims 14-15:
(i) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
(ii) Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 does not explicitly teach:
a third sheet of material covering the second sheet of material to form a third portion of the attachment, a portion of the neck and a second portion of the platform; nor
wherein opposing distal ends of the third sheet of material are located on a common lateral side of the rotor blade.
(iii) Kleinow is also in the field of blades (see title) and teaches a blade (rotor blade assembly 32) comprising:
an attachment (dovetail 33), a neck (portion of blade proximate sidewalls 36/38, located between platform 50 and dovetail 33, Fig 6), and a platform (platform 50);
a second sheet of material (unlabeled material forming gaspath facing portion of platform 50, Fig 6), and
a third sheet of material (damper retaining plies 62) covering the second sheet of material to form a third portion of the attachment, a portion of the neck and a second portion of the platform (Fig 6);
wherein opposing distal ends of the third sheet of material are located on a common lateral side of the rotor blade (Fig 6).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the attachment as taught by Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 to further include a third sheet of material as taught by Kleinow for the purpose of providing integral platform and damper features on a CMC blade component, improving structural strength of the component including the platform, allowing for the positioning of a damper therein, and rooting plies in supporting features like a dovetail (Col 10 Ln 64 – Col 11 Ln 13).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10577939 to Vetters in view of US 10710317 to Rice in further view of US 10180071 to Freeman (henceforth referred to as Freeman ‘071)
(a) Regarding claim 17:
(i) Vetters discloses a manufacturing method (Col 2 Lns 60-62), comprising forming a rotor blade (blade 210) for a rotor assembly with a rotational axis (Col 4 Lns 9-10), wherein:
the rotor blade includes an airfoil (216), a neck (thin portion between airfoil 216 and root 212, Fig 4) and an attachment (root 212);
the neck radially connects the airfoil and the attachment (Fig 4); and
the attachment extends axially between an attachment first axial side and an attachment second axial side (forward end 15 and aft end 17), and
the attachment having an attachment bottom surface (outer surface 224 of second section 228, Fig 4) extending between the attachment first axial side and the attachment second axial side (Col 6 Lns 19-22),
the attachment bottom surface generally opposite to the neck (Fig 4);
a base of the attachment (flared portion of proximal end 222, Fig 4);
a sheet of material (first portion 248 and second portion 250 of core 218, Fig 4) forming a portion of the attachment, a portion of the neck, and a portion of the airfoil (Fig 4); and
a second sheet of material (wrap 220) wrapped over the sheet of material to form a second portion of the attachment including the attachment first axial side (Col 6 Lns 19-22), the attachment second axial side (Col 6 Lns 19-22), and the attachment bottom surface (Fig 4), a portion of the neck (Fig 4), and a portion of a platform (214, Fig 4) of the rotor blade, and
the second sheet of material comprises woven material or braided material (wrap 20/220 has 3D weave, Col 13 Lns 52-55; “woven/braided CMC airfoil”, Col 14 Lns 35-37; woven/braided CMC, Col 15 Ln 39).
(ii) Vetters does not explicitly disclose wherein:
a first end portion of the attachment projects axially out from the neck to the attachment first axial side and having a triangular cross-sectional geometry, and a second end portion of the attachment projects axially out from the neck to the attachment second axial side and having a triangular cross-sectional geometry;
an attachment preform is configured to form the base of the attachment, the attachment preform projects axially along and partially forms the first end portion of the attachment, and the attachment preform projects axially into and partially forms the second end portion of the attachment, the attachment preform partially forming the attachment bottom surface, wherein a length of the attachment preform is at least 95% of a length of the attachment;
the sheet of material is wrapped about the attachment preform, nor
the second sheet of material is wrapped about the attachment preform and over the sheet of material.
(iii) Rice is also in the field of rotor assemblies (see title) and teaches a rotor blade (blade assembly 602/802) comprising:
a neck (portion of base 612/836 between forward and aft channels 628/630/828/830, Figs 6A-9) and an attachment (radially innermost portion of base 612/836 comprising base tangs 624/626/824/826, Figs 6A-9),
the attachment extending axially between an attachment first axial side (one of axially forward and aft sides of respective forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826) and an attachment second axial side (the other of axially forward and aft sides of respective forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826),
a first end portion of the attachment (respective one of forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826) projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment first axial side (Figs 6A-9), and
a second end portion of the attachment (respective other of forward and aft tangs 624/626/824/826) projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment second axial side (Figs 6A-9).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the attachment as disclosed by Vetters with the above aforementioned first and second end portions extending axially from the neck as taught by Rice for the purpose of allowing for the use of supportive structures (end caps 606/608, forward and aft rings 850/852) supporting exchanging loads between the blade and a rotor (Col 9 Lns 38-39/61-64).
(v) Freeman ‘071 is also in the field of rotor blades (see title) and teaches:
a rotor blade (200/410/510) comprising an airfoil (216/416/516), a neck (stem 220/420/520, Figs 6/8/11), and an attachment (root core 222/422/522 and root casing 224/424/524), the attachment having an attachment bottom surface (bottom surface of attachment, Figs 6/8/11);
an attachment preform (plies 246/446/546 and 248/548, Figs 6/8/11) configured to form a base of the attachment (Figs 6/8/11),
the attachment preform projects axially along and partially forms a first end portion of the attachment (Figs 5-6/8-9), and
the attachment preform projects axially into and partially forms the second end portion of the attachment (Figs 5-6/8-9),
the attachment preform partially forming the attachment bottom surface (Figs 6/8/11),
wherein a length of the attachment preform is at least 95% of a length of the attachment (root cores 222/422 reasonably disclosed in Figs 4-5/9 as extending the entire length of the root); and
a sheet of material (ply 242/442/542) wrapped about the attachment preform to form a portion of the attachment, a portion of the neck, and a portion of the airfoil (Figs 6/8/11).
(vi) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sheet of material as disclosed by Vetters with the above aforementioned sheet of material and attachment preform as taught by Freeman ‘071 for the purpose of maintaining the shape of the root by distributing the load placed upon the root as hoop stress (Col 9 Lns 56-67).
(vii) The Examiner notes that the attachment of Vetters has a triangular cross-sectional geometry and that when modified as described above the first and second end portions of the combination would have a triangular cross-sectional geometry.
(viii) The Examiner further notes that, as the second sheet of material wraps around the first sheet about the attachment/neck as disclosed by Vetters, the second sheet of material of Freeman ‘917 as modified by Vetters as further modified by Rice as even further modified by Freeman ‘071 would also be wrapped about the attachment preform.
(ix) Vetters as modified by Rice as further modified by Freeman ‘071 does not teach wherein the attachment preform is less than a length of the attachment.
(x) The Applicant has disclosed no criticality, nor any new or unexpected results, from the attachment preform having a length that is less than a length of the attachment. The difference between the length of the attachment and “less than a length of the attachment” is infinitesimally small and are so mathematically close that the difference between the claimed attachment preform length and the attachment preform length as taught by the prior art is virtually negligible absent any showing of unexpected results or criticality; and prima facie one skilled in the art would predictably expect them to have the same results. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
(xi) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the length of the attachment preform to be less than the length of the attachment as claimed since such a modification would not change the results of the prior art, see MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claim(s) 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10180071 to Freeman (henceforth referred to as Freeman ‘071).
(a) Regarding claim 21:
(i) Freeman ‘071 discloses an apparatus for a rotor assembly with a rotational axis (Col 1 Lns 45-50), the apparatus comprising:
a rotor blade (turbine blade 510) including an airfoil (516), a neck (stem 520) and an attachment (root core 522 and root casing 524, Fig 11);
the neck radially connecting the airfoil and the attachment (Fig 11);
the attachment extending axially between an attachment first axial side and an attachment second axial side (forward end 584, aft end 586),
a first end portion of the attachment projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment first axial side (respective portion of retention pin 582 extending axially beyond neck 520 to respective end 584 or 586), and
a second end portion of the attachment projecting axially out from the neck to the attachment second axial side (respective other portion of retention pin 582 extending axially beyond neck 520 to respective other end 584 or 586),
the attachment having an attachment bottom surface (bottom of attachment, Figs 13) extending between the attachment first axial side and the attachment second axial side (Figs 10/12),
the attachment bottom surface generally opposite to the neck (Figs 11/13);
an attachment preform (plies 546 and 548, Fig 11) configured to form a base of the attachment (Figs 6/8/11),
the attachment preform projecting axially into and partially forming the first end portion of the attachment and the second end portion of the attachment (Figs 5-6/8-9),
the attachment preform partially forming the attachment bottom surface (Figs 10-13, Col 16 Lns 23-24),
wherein a length of the attachment preform is at least 95% of a length of the attachment (root cores 222/422 reasonably disclosed in Figs 4-5/9 as extending the entire length of the root); and
a sheet of material (ply 542) forming a portion of the attachment including the attachment first axial side, the attachment second axial side, and the attachment bottom surface, a portion of the neck, (Fig 11, Col 16 Lns 23-24) and a portion of a platform (Col 16 Lns 31-33) of the rotor blade (Fig 11),
the sheet of material comprising woven material or braided material (each ply woven to form a sheet, Col 16 Lns 13-15); and
a cooling cavity (entry ports 471, hollow core 472, apertures 474, and cooling channel 476) extending through the airfoil (Fig 8), the neck (Fig 8), the attachment (Fig 8), the attachment preform (Fig 8), and a portion of the sheet of material (via entry ports 471, Col 15 Lns 8-9).
(ii) Freeman ‘071 does not explicitly disclose wherein an axial length of the attachment preform is less than an axial length of the attachment between the attachment first axial side and the attachment second axial side; and wherein the cooling cavity extends through the sheet of material wrapped along a bottom surface of the attachment surface.
(iii) The Applicant has not disclosed any criticality nor any new or unexpected results from the first and second end portions having a triangular cross sectional geometry and there is no teaching in the prior art that the apparatus of Freeman ‘071 would perform different having first and second end portions with triangular cross-sectional geometries. As the disclosure of Freeman ‘071 substantially discloses all other structural limitations of the claim, the claimed cross-sectional shape of the first and second end portions does not distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first and second end portions as disclosed by Freeman ‘071 to have triangular cross-sectional geometries as an obvious matter of design choice, see MPEP 2144.04(IV).
(v) The Applicant has not disclosed any criticality nor any new or unexpected results from having an axial length of the preform be less than an axial length of the attachment and there is no teaching in the prior art that the apparatus of Freeman ‘071 would perform differently having the claimed size and proportions. As the disclosure of Freeman ‘071 substantially discloses all other structural limitations of the claim, the claimed size and proportion of the preform does not distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
(vi) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the preform disclosed by Freeman ‘071 to have an axial length less than an axial length between first and second axial sides of the attachment as an obvious matter of design choice, see MPEP 2144.04(IV).
(vii) In KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), the Supreme Court held that "obvious to try" was a valid rationale for an obviousness finding, for example, when there is a "design need" or "market demand" and there are a "finite number" of solutions. Freeman ‘071 discloses a design need to supply air to a cooling channel through entry ports 471 formed through the root casing 424 and root core 422. The root casing 424 and root core 422 provide only three locations for entry ports 471 to be formed: through one, both, or all of the two radially extending circumferential walls and the circumferentially extending bottom wall; and one of ordinary skill in the art would find forming the entry ports 471 therein to have a reasonable expectation of success as it is disclosed by Freeman ‘071 as suitable (Col 15 Lns 8-9).
(viii) At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to try the above aforementioned locations with the motivation of meeting design need.
(b) Regarding claim 22:
(i) Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 21.
(ii) Freeman ‘071 further discloses wherein the attachment preform has a hollow tubular body (hollow center 472, Fig 8).
(c) Regarding claim 23:
(i) Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 21.
(ii) Freeman ‘071 further discloses wherein the attachment preform comprises an outer shell (plies 246/446/546 and 248/548, Figs 6/8/11) surrounding filler material (filler 254; composite pin 582, Fig 11); and the filler material comprises chopped fibers (Col 9 Lns 34-36).
(d) Regarding claim 24:
(i) Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 21.
(ii) Freeman ‘071 further discloses wherein the attachment preform comprises an outer shell (plies 246/446/546 and 248/548, Figs 6/8/11) surrounding filler material (filler 254; composite pin 582, Fig 11); and the filler material comprises foam (Col 9 Ln 52).
(e) Regarding claim 25:
(i) Freeman ‘071 teaches the apparatus of claim 21.
(ii) Freeman ‘071 further discloses:
wherein the platform extends axially between a platform first axial side and a platform second axial side (first and second axial sides of platform 214/414/514, Figs 4-5/9-10);
the attachment first axial side is axially recessed from the platform first axial side (reasonably disclosed in Figs 4-5/9-2); and
the attachment second axial side is axially recessed from the platform second axial side (reasonably disclosed in Figs 4-5/9-2).
Conclusion
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 Justin A Pruitt whose telephone number is (571)272-8383. The examiner can normally be reached T-F 8:30am - 6:30pm.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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.
/JUSTIN A PRUITT/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745