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 .
The amendment filed 3/30/2026 has been entered. Claims 2-3, 6-7, and 10 have been canceled. Claims 1, 4-5, 8-9, and 11-18 are pending in the application. Claims 13-18 have been withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. Election was made with traverse in the response filed 6/21/2024. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Specification
The amendment filed 3/30/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: in Paragraph 0034, the amendment incorrectly changes “reactive rare earth element” to “non-reactive rare earth element” (as opposed to “reactive non-rare earth element” placing the “non-“ in the wrong position) which is not supported by the original disclosure given that the element of the CMAS-reactive overlay 18 is required to be “reactive” not “non-reactive”.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gorman (US2008/0113095A1) in view of Hazel (US2020/0400028A1). Gorman teaches a calcium-magnesium-alumino-silicate (CMAS)-reactive thermal barrier coating (TBC) (20) and a gas turbine substrate (22) comprising the CMAS-reactive TBC (20) on a surface thereof, wherein the CMAS-reactive TBC comprises a bond coat (24), an alumina scale (28) that chemically bonds a TBC (26), formed of a thermal-insulating material, to the bond coat (24) an the substrate (22), wherein the TBC (26) preferably comprises yttria-stabilized zirconia (YSZ) and has a columnar structure with porosity (34) defined by gaps between individual columns of the TBC (26) (reading upon the claimed “ceramic coating” and “wherein the ceramic coating comprise a plurality of vertically-oriented gaps”; Abstract, Paragraphs 0010-0011 and 0016-0019, Figs. 1-2). Gorman teaches that “additional porosity is also likely to be present within the columns, for example, in the surfaces of individual columns if the TBC 26 were deposited by EB-PVD to have a feather-like grain structure as known in the art” (Paragraph 0019). Gorman teaches that a protective film (32) is provided on the surface of the TBC (26) to resist infiltration of contaminants such as CMAS that can melt and infiltrate the TBC to cause spallation (Abstract). Gorman teaches that the protective film (32) is on the outermost surface of the blade (10), thereby protecting the underlying TBC (26), and comprises “a surface deposit 36 that overlies the surface 30 of the TBC 26 so as to be available for sacrificial reaction with CMAS, and further comprises an infiltrated internal deposit 38 that extends into porosity 34 within the TBC 26 and provides a level of CMAS protection in the event the surface deposit 36 is breached or lost through spallation, erosion, and/or consumption” (Paragraph 0019). Gorman teaches that “[a]s represented in FIG. 2, the surface deposit 36 of the protective film 32 forms a continuous layer on the outer surface 30 of the TBC 26, though it is within the scope of [the] invention that a discontinuous layer could be deposited” and that the “degree to which the internal deposit 38 of the protective film 32 occupies the porosity 34 between and within the TBC grains will depend in part on the particular composition used to form the protective film 32…and particularly on the structure of the TBC 26, with more open porosity receiving (and needing) greater amounts of the internal deposit 38” (Paragraph 0020). Gorman teaches that the protective film (32) preferably “contains at least one metal oxide that resists infiltration of CMAS into the TBC 26, such as by reacting with CMAS to raise its melting point and/or viscosity,” with alumina (Al2O3) and magnesia (MgO) being preferred, and “with a preferred protective film 32 being predominantly or more preferably entirely one or more of these oxides”, although Gorman also teaches that other metal oxides could be used, such as those disclosed in the cited patents to Hasz et al. (Paragraph 0021), including previously cited USPN 5,660,885 as well as USPN 5,773,141, 5,871,820 and 5,914,189 (wherein the former USPN 5,660,885 was simply referred to as “Hasz” on the record and recites titanium as an element that may be present in the CMAS and thus may be present in the sacrificial oxide coating, see particularly Cols. 3-4). Gorman also teaches that the “metal oxide content of the protective film 32 is sacrificially consumed by reacting with molten CMAS that deposits on the film 32 and possibly infiltrates the porosity 34 of the TBC 26, and in doing so forms one or more refractory phases with higher melting temperatures than CMAS” and that “[i]n the case of alumina and magnesia, reaction with molten CMAS causes the levels of these oxides in the CMAS to be increased, yielding a modified CMAS with a higher melting temperature and/or greater viscosity that inhibits infiltration of the molten CMAS into the TBC 26” and “[a]s a result, the reaction product or products of CMAS and the one or more metal oxides of the protective film 32 more slowly infiltrate the TBC 26 and tend to resolidify before sufficient infiltration has occurred to cause spallation” (Paragraph 0021, reading upon “wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay has a material composition that will react with molten CMAS” as in instant claims 8 and 11). Gorman teaches that the protective film (32) is formed by applying to the TBC surface (30) a metal film containing the one or more metals of the desired metal oxide or oxides, such as by ion plasma deposition or other potential deposition technique (thus conforming to the surface), and then oxidizing the metal film to form the desired metal oxide(s), wherein “[i]f infiltration of the TBC porosity 34 is desired, the metal film can be deposited so as to infiltrate the TBC 26 during deposition” and that infiltration and penetration into the TBC porosity (34) can be promoted and/or controlled by heating and/or alloying to modify the fluidity of the film (Paragraphs 0022-0023); and hence the protective film (32) taught by Gorman reads upon the claimed “CMAS-reactive overlay coating, wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay coating conforms to a surface of the ceramic coating and comprises a compound that forms a crystalline precipitate when reacted with molten CMAS responsive to CMAS infiltration into the thermal barrier coating; wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay coating consists of a material selected from a group consisting of a non-rare earth oxide and a mixed non-rare earth oxide; wherein a ceramic coating phase is chemically stable with the CMAS-reactive overlay coating…wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay coating extends into gaps and is deposited on inner walls of the ceramic coating, and wherein the plurality of vertically-oriented gaps remain open; wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay extends into the vertically-oriented gaps from an outer surface of the ceramic coating” and given the presence of the bond coat (24) and alumina scale (28) also reading upon the claimed “the CMAS-reactive overlay is located to avoid interaction with a substrate [or bond coat] to maintain separation between CMAS-reactive overlay and the substrate” as in instant claim 1 and similarly in instant claim 9; such that the only difference between the teachings of Gorman and the claimed invention as recited in instant claims 1 and 9 is that Gorman does not specifically teach that the protective film (32) as the claimed CMAS-reactive overlay extends into the ceramic coating to a depth of one of one-third a thickness of the ceramic coating as in instant claim 1 or a depth of one-half of a thickness of the ceramic coating as in instant claim 9.
However, as discussed previously on the record, Hazel teaches a similar CMAS-reactive thermal barrier coating (Abstract) and coated gas turbine engine substrate coated with the CMAS-reactive thermal barrier coating (Paragraphs 0009 and 0011), wherein the CMAS-reactive thermal barrier coating comprises: a substrate (12) with a ceramic coating (16), a CMAS-reactive overlay coating (18), and a bond coat (14) positioned between the substrate (12) and the ceramic coating (16) (Paragraph 0011, Fig. 1), wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay coating conforms to a surface of the ceramic coating (Abstract, Paragraph 0004) and comprises a compound that forms a crystalline precipitate when reacted with molten CMAS responsive to CMAS infiltration into the thermal barrier coating (Abstract, Paragraph 0004); wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay coating (18) comprises a reactive overlay material that can be any apatite-forming material including but not limited to rare-earth oxides (Paragraph 0010), such as pure rare earth oxides, mixed rare earth oxides, and rare earth aluminates (Paragraph 0017); wherein a ceramic coating phase is chemically stable with the CMAS-reactive overlay coating (Abstract, Paragraph 0004); and the CMAS-reactive overlay is located to avoid interaction with bond coat (14) and/or substrate (12) as in instant claims 9 and 1, respectively, to maintain separation between the CMAS-reactive overlay (18) and the bond coat (14) and thus also the substrate (12) as in instant claims 9 and 1, respectively (Paragraph 0019); wherein the ceramic coating (16) comprises a plurality of vertically-oriented gaps (22) (Paragraphs 0013-0020, Fig. 1); wherein the CMAS-reactive overlay coating (18) extends into the gaps and is deposited on inner walls of the ceramic coating (Paragraphs 0018-0020 and 0038, Fig. 1); and wherein the plurality of vertically-oriented gaps remain open (Paragraphs 0018-0020 and 0038; Fig. 1), as in the teachings of Gorman.
Hazel also teaches that the CMAS-reactive overlay extends into the vertically-oriented gaps from an outer surface of the ceramic coating to a depth of one-third of the thickness of the ceramic top coat as in instant claim 1 (Paragraphs 0019, 0041, and 0048; Claim 10), preferably to a depth of one-half as in instant claim 9 (Paragraphs 0019 and 0042; Claim 11); and further teaches that the CMAS-reactive overlay is deposited in pores open to the vertically-oriented gaps as in instant claim 4 (Paragraph 0039), has a thickness ranging from 10 to 500 nanometers as in instant claims 5 and 12 (Paragraphs 0019, 0026, 0040, and 0049; Claim 9), and has a material composition that will react with molten CMAS as in instant claims 8 and 11 (Paragraph 0043, Claim 12). Hence, given that Gorman does not specifically limit the depth to which the protective film (32) extends into the pores of the vertically-oriented gaps and broadly recites that the “degree to which the internal deposit 38 of the protective film 32 occupies the porosity 34 between and within the TBC grains will depend in part on the particular composition used to form the protective film 32…and particularly on the structure of the TBC 26” wherein the structure appears to be the same as taught by Hazel, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Hazel including with respect to the infiltration depth, deposition in the pores/gaps, and thickness of the overlay (which is a known result-effective variable as generally taught by Gorman and Hazel) with the teachings of Gorman to arrive at the claimed invention as recited in instant claims 1-2, 4-5, and 8-12 given that it is prima facie obviousness to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 3/30/2026 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above. Any objection or rejection from the prior office action not restated above has been withdrawn by the Examiner in light of Applicant’s claim amendments and arguments filed 3/30/2026.
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 MONIQUE R JACKSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1508. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Thursdays from 10:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/MONIQUE R JACKSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights