DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Status of the Claims
This is a final rejection in response to the amendments and arguments filed 11/13/2025. Claims 1-16 and 21-24 are currently pending with claims 23-24 new and claims 1 and 7 amended. Claims 17-20 have been canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/13/2025, with respect to the art rejections, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the prior art Umeyama does not appear to mention surge or compressor backspin at all, and further arguments relative to Umeyama, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Examiner contends that the prior art Sommer already teaches the use of a variable diffuser ring to control stall and surge within a compressor of which phenomenon can involve reversed flow control (see ¶ [0005], [0006]). Thus it is obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art to understand that the modification of the system of Sommer where the diffuser ring contacts the diffuser plate, a technique known in the art as taught by Umeyama, would not only prevent flow through the centrifugal compressor but also back flow of gas through the centrifugal compressor would be predictably blocked.
Examiner contends that the combination of the prior art teaches all the limitations of the claims as amended.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the VGD mechanism includes a diffuser ring that is actuated to mitigate, eliminate, and/or prevent instances of surge, such as during shutdown ... e.g., immediate shutdown ... of a compressor) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7-8, 13-14 and 21-22 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2011/0048046 to Sommer et al. (Sommer) in view of US Patent 8,118,543 to Umeyama et al. (Umeyama).
In Reference to Claim 1
Sommer discloses a variable geometry diffuser of a centrifugal compressor (Abstract), comprising:
a diffuser ring (Fig. 2: 210) configured to extend into a diffuser gap (202) formed between a nozzle base plate (208) and a diffuser plate (206) of the centrifugal compressor (108); and
an actuator (Fig. 6A: 650) configured to move the diffuser ring between a retracted position and an extended position ([0036]) to control an operating parameter of the centrifugal compressor without prerotation vanes in the centrifugal compressor (Abstract and [0050]), wherein the diffuser ring extends across the diffuser gap in the extended position to control the flow of gas through the diffuser gap ([0036]) but does not explicitly teach “... to contact the diffuser plate and prevent flow of gas through the centrifugal compressor ....”
Umeyama is related to variable geometry diffuser of a centrifugal compressor (abstract), as the claimed invention, and teaches wherein a diffuser ring (Fig. 1, diffuser wall 27 for instance) extends across a diffuser gap (20 for instance) in an extended position (see figure 4) to contact a diffuser plate (21 for instance) and prevent flow of gas through the diffuser gap (col 6, ll 14-26, the closing of diffuser 20 for instance where no flows through).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the system of Sommer wherein the diffuser ring extends across the diffuser gap in the extended position (of Sommer) to contact (as taught by Umeyama) the diffuser plate (of Sommer) and prevent flow of gas through the centrifugal compressor (predictably by the contacting of the ring and the plate for instance), so as to use an art known technique (of closing of a diffuser gap in a centrifugal compressor via contacting a diffuser ring and a diffuser plate as taught by Umeyama) into the system of Sommer and predictably control the flow of gas in Sommer.
In Reference to Claim 2
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the variable geometry diffuser of claim 1, wherein, in the extended position of the diffuser ring (Sommer: 210), a first surface of the diffuser ring (Sommer: left surface of 210 adjacent 206, not labeled) engages with (as in contact with as taught by Umeyama, see figure 4) a second surface of the diffuser plate (Sommer: surface of 206 adjacent 210, not labeled).
In Reference to Claim 7
Sommer discloses a centrifugal compressor (Abstract), comprising:
a diffuser ring (Fig. 2: 210) configured to extend into a diffuser gap (202) formed between a nozzle base plate (208) and a diffuser plate (206) of the centrifugal compressor (108); and
an actuator (Fig. 6A: 650) configured to move the diffuser ring between a retracted position and an extended position ([0036]) to control an operating parameter of the centrifugal compressor without prerotation vanes in the centrifugal compressor (Abstract and [0050]), wherein the diffuser ring extends across the diffuser gap in the extended position to control the back flow of gas through the centrifugal compressor (¶ [0005], the control or reverse flow for instance); a controller (see ¶ [0006]) communicatively coupled to the actuator (see ¶ [0036]), but does not explicitly teach the diffuser ring “... to contact the diffuser plate and block back flow of gas ...,” or “... wherein the controller is configured to instruct the actuator to transition the diffuser ring to the extended position in response to suspension of operation of the centrifugal compressor....”
Umeyama is related to variable geometry diffuser of a centrifugal compressor (abstract), as the claimed invention, and teaches wherein a diffuser ring (Fig. 1, diffuser wall 27 for instance) extends across a diffuser gap (20 for instance) in an extended position (see figure 4) to contact a diffuser plate (21 for instance) and prevent flow of gas through the diffuser gap (col 6, ll 14-26, the closing of diffuser 20 for instance where no flows through), and wherein instructions is provide to an actuator (col 5, ll 23-31) to transition the diffuser ring (Fig. 1, 27 for instance) to the extended position in response to suspension of operation of the centrifugal compressor (col 5, ll 23-31, 27 to move to close contact with 21 when compressor is stopped for instance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the system of Sommer wherein the diffuser ring extends across the diffuser gap in the extended position (of Sommer) to contact (as taught by Umeyama) the diffuser plate (of Sommer) and block back flow of gas through the centrifugal compressor (predictably by the contacting of the ring and the plate for instance), and wherein the controller (of Sommer) is configured to instruct the actuator to transition the diffuser ring to the extended position in response to suspension of operation of the centrifugal compressor (as taught by Umeyama), so as to use an art known technique (of closing of a diffuser gap in a centrifugal compressor via contacting a diffuser ring and a diffuser plate and of closing of a diffuser gap in a centrifugal compressor in response to a stopped compressor as taught by Umeyama for instance) into the system of Sommer and predictably control the flow of gas of Sommer including during inoperability of the compressor.
In Reference to Claim 8
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 7, comprising a controller communicatively coupled to the actuator (Sommer: [0049]), wherein the controller is configured to instruct the actuator to transition the diffuser ring between the retracted position and the extended position based on sensor feedback indicative of the operating parameter of the centrifugal compressor (Sommer: [0049], [0050]).
In Reference to Claim 13
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 7, wherein the controller is configured to determine an occurrence of surge or stall of the centrifugal compressor based on sensor feedback and to instruct the actuator to transition the diffuser ring to the extended position upon determination of the occurrence of surge or stall (Sommer: [0050]).
In Reference to Claim 14
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 7, wherein the controller communicatively coupled to the actuator (Sommer: col 10, ll 9-30) and configured to store a distance between a first surface of the diffuser ring (Sommer: left surface of 210 adjacent 206, not labeled) and a second surface of the diffuser plate (Sommer: surface of 206 adjacent 210, not labeled), wherein the controller is configured to determine the extended position of the diffuser ring based on the distance (Sommer, [0049]: such as using input of diffuser position).
In Reference to Claim 21
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the variable geometry diffuser of claim 1, wherein the diffuser ring (Sommer: 210) is configured to contact a mating surface of the diffuser plate (Sommer: 206) in the extended position (as taught by Umeyama figure 4).
In Reference to Claim 22
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 7, wherein the diffuser ring (Sommer: 210) is configured to contact a mating surface of the diffuser plate (Sommer: 206) in the extended position (as taught by Umeyama figure 4).
Claim 3-4 and 15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2011/0048046 to Sommer et al. (Sommer) in view of US Patent 8,118,543 to Umeyama et al. (Umeyama) as applied to claim(s) 1 and 7 above, and further in view of US Patent 3,362,624 to Endress (Endress).
In Reference to Claim 3
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the variable geometry diffuser of claim 1, except, “… wherein the diffuser ring comprises a first flange that is extendable into the diffuser gap and a second flange that extends cross-wise to the first flange ….”
Endress is related to a centrifugal compressor having a diffuser ring (17 for instance) to control flow through the compressor (Abstract), as the claimed invention, and teaches wherein the diffuser ring comprises a first flange (portion of 17 extending into 5 for instance, not labeled) that is extendable into a diffuser gap (5) and a second flange (portion of 17 attached to 15 for instance, not labeled) that extends cross-wise to the first flange (extends perpendicular for instance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide in the system of Sommer, as a matter of replacing one diffuser ring with another, wherein the diffuser ring comprises a first flange that is extendable into the diffuser gap and a second flange that extends cross-wise to the first flange, as taught by Endress, so as to provide a simple substitution of one known element (the diffuser ring of Sommer for instance) for another (the diffuser ring of Endress for instance) to obtain predictable results (of the diffuser ring extending into and out of the diffuser gap and control flow through the diffuser gap) which was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, MPEP 2141 III B.
In Reference to Claim 4
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama and Endress, discloses the variable geometry diffuser of claim 3, wherein the second flange (Endress: portion of 17 attached to 15 for instance, not labeled) comprises a first surface (Endress: right surface of portion of 17 attached to 15, not labeled), a second surface (Endress: left surface of portion of 17 attached to 15, not labeled), and a radial surface (Endress: top surface of portion of 17 attached to 15, not labeled) extending between the first surface and the second surface, wherein the first flange (Endress: portion of 17 extending into 5 for instance, not labeled) extends from the first surface but does not teach “… is positioned radially inward of the radial surface with respect to a circumference of the diffuser ring ….”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the diffuser ring of Sommer, as modified by Endress, to be positioned radially inward of the radial surface with respect to a circumference of the diffuser ring because it has been held that merely rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art - MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C).
In Reference to Claim 15
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 7, comprising the nozzle base plate (126) of the centrifugal compressor (100 for instance), wherein the diffuser ring (130) is disposed within a groove (132) of the nozzle base plate, except, “… wherein the diffuser ring is formed by a first flange extending from the groove toward the diffuser gap and a second flange extending crosswise to the first flange ….”
Endress is related to a centrifugal compressor having a diffuser ring (17 for instance) to control flow through the compressor (Abstract), as the claimed invention, and teaches wherein the diffuser ring is formed by a first flange (portion of 17 extending into 5 for instance, not labeled) extending from a groove (45 for instance) toward a diffuser gap (5 for instance) and a second flange (portion of 17 attached to 15 for instance, not labeled) extending crosswise to the first flange.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide in the system of Sommer, as a matter of replacing one diffuser ring with another, wherein the diffuser ring is formed by a first flange extending from the groove toward the diffuser gap and a second flange extending crosswise to the first flange, as taught by Endress, so as to provide a simple substitution of one known element (the diffuser ring of Sommer for instance) for another (the diffuser ring of Endress for instance) to obtain predictable results (of the diffuser ring extending into and out of the diffuser gap and control flow through the diffuser gap) which was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, MPEP 2141 III B.
Claim 9 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2011/0048046 to Sommer et al. (Sommer) in view of US Patent 8,118,543 to Umeyama et al. (Umeyama) as applied to claim(s) 8 above, and further in view of US Patent 6,857,845 to Stabley et al. (Stabley).
In Reference to Claim 9
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 8, except explicitly, “… wherein the operating parameter comprises a speed of the centrifugal compressor or an acoustic energy generated by the centrifugal compressor ….”
Stabley is related to a centrifugal compressor having a diffuser ring (Fig. 2: 210 for instance) to control flow, as in a control of an operating parameter, through the compressor (Abstract), as the claimed invention, and teaches wherein the operating parameter (onset of stall for instance) comprises a speed of the centrifugal compressor (this limitation satisfied as being an alternative) or an acoustic energy generated by the centrifugal compressor (sound or acoustic pressure for instance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide in the system of Sommer wherein the operating parameter comprises a speed of the centrifugal compressor or an acoustic energy generated by the centrifugal compressor, as taught by Stabley, so as to take corrective action to change the operation of the centrifugal compressor to prevent stall or surge (Stabley: Abstract).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2011/0048046 to Sommer et al. (Sommer) in view of US Patent 8,118,543 to Umeyama et al. (Umeyama) as applied to claim(s) 7 above, and further in view of US Patent 6,139,262 to Ravidranath (Ravidranath).
In Reference to Claim 10
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 7, wherein a controller is communicatively coupled to the actuator (col 10, ll 9-30), and calibration of the controller (col 10, ll 10-18: the control means as configured to stop the diffuser ring between any position of fully extended and fully retracted), except, “… wherein the actuator is configured to provide a first signal to the controller indicative of a first position of the actuator corresponding to the diffuser ring in the extended position and to provide a second signal to the controller indicative of a second position of the actuator corresponding to the diffuser ring in the retracted position to enable calibration of the controller ….”
Ravidranath is related to a centrifugal compressor (Abstract) having a diffuser ring (Fig. 8: 34 for instance) driven by an actuator (Fig. 7: 110 for instance), as the claimed invention, and teaches wherein the actuator is configured to provide a first signal to a controller indicative of a first position of the actuator corresponding to the diffuser ring in the extended position and to provide a second signal to the controller indicative of a second position of the actuator corresponding to the diffuser ring in the retracted position (col 6, ll 20-27: such as a signal from a potentiometer or position sensor to control device indicative of the diffuser ring position) to enable calibration of the controller (col 6, ll 28-43: such as to enable the optimal position of the diffuser ring).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide in the system of Sommer wherein the actuator is configured to provide a first signal to the controller indicative of a first position of the actuator corresponding to the diffuser ring in the extended position and to provide a second signal to the controller indicative of a second position of the actuator corresponding to the diffuser ring in the retracted position to enable calibration of the controller, as taught by Ravidranath, so as to determine the optimal position of the diffuser ring and prevent stall or surge (Ravidranath: col 6, ll 21-43).
In Reference to Claim 11
Sommer, as modified by Umeyama and Ravidranath, discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 10, wherein the controller is configured to determine a location of the diffuser ring relative to the diffuser gap when the actuator is between the first position and the second position based on the calibration of the controller and without use of additional sensors (Sommer [0049], [0050]: the controller to maintain the required position of the diffuser ring and based on position).
Claim 12 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2011/0048046 to Sommer et al. (Sommer) in view of US Patent 8,118,543 to Umeyama et al. (Umeyama) as applied to claim(s) 7 above, and further in view of US Patent 4,611,969 to Zinsmeyer (Zinsmeyer).
In Reference to Claim 12
Sommer discloses the centrifugal compressor of claim 7, wherein a controller is communicatively coupled to the actuator (col 10, ll 9-30), except, “… wherein the controller is configured to instruct the actuator to transition the diffuser ring to the extended position upon receiving feedback indicative of a loss of electrical power supplied by a power source to the centrifugal compressor ….”
Zinsmeyer is related to a centrifugal compressor with a variable diffuser section (Abstract), as the claimed invention, and teaches wherein a controller is configured to instruct an actuator to transition a diffuser ring to a position selected in accordance to load requirements of the compressor upon receiving feedback indicative of a loss of electrical power supplied by a power source to the centrifugal compressor (col 3, ll 54 thru col 4, ll 6: a controller, 72 for instance, to move diffuser ring 46 for instance when loss of power occurs) but does not teach the position of the diffuser ring to be “… the extended position ….”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide in the system of Sommer wherein the controller is configured to instruct the actuator to transition the diffuser ring a position selected in accordance to load requirements of the compressor upon receiving feedback indicative of a loss of electrical power supplied by a power source to the centrifugal compressor, as taught by Zinsmeyer, so as to allow for calculation of the position of the diffuser ring during power loss (Zinsmeyer: col 3, ll 54 thru col 4, ll 6).
Sommer in view of Zinsmeyer does not teach the position of the diffuser ring to be the extended position, however, in view of the prior art teachings of Zinsmeyer (in this case that the position of the diffuser ring selected after power loss is selected in accordance with predetermined load requirements, Zinsmeyer) the position of the diffuser ring is a result effective variable, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify such that the position of the diffuser ring to be the extended position, since it has been held that optimizing a result effective variable was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977), In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955),“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05 I and II.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 16 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.
Claims 23-24 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not render obvious or teach wherein a radial gap extends between the second flange and the nozzle base plate to enable gas to flow from the diffuser gap into the groove and surround at least a portion of the second flange (claim 5); or wherein a radial gap extends between the second flange and the nozzle base plate to enable gas flow from the diffuser gap into the groove (claim 16); or a radial gap extends between the nozzle base plate and a portion of the diffuser ring disposed within the groove to enable gas to flow from the diffuser gap into the groove and surround the portion of the diffuser ring (claim 23) so as to optimize and control pressures around the diffuser ring.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, as cited in the Notice of References Cited, are cited to show variable diffuser systems diffuser ring with mating surfaces.
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 WAYNE A LAMBERT whose telephone number is (571)270-3516. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9 am - 7 pm.
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 E 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.
/WAYNE A LAMBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745