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 .
This communication is responsive to amended application filed on 01/21/2026.
Claim 2 is canceled.
Claims 1, and 2-7 are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments/amendments, see Remarks pgs. 5-7, filed 01/21/2026, with respect to claims 1-7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 35 USC 101 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments/amendments, see Remarks pgs. 7-9, filed 01/21/2026, with respect to claims 1-7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 35 USC 103 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 1 contains (i.e. step VIII, based on the fluctuation characteristics of the temperature field of the woven structural CMC turbine vane, adjusting weaving-angles of the warp yarns and weft yarns in the woven structural CMC turbine vane to optimize the temperature field of the woven structural CMC turbine vane”) subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tu et al (Zecan Tu, Junkui Mao, Hua Jiang, Xingsi Han, Zhenzong He, “Numerical method for the thermal analysis of a ceramic matrix composite turbine vane considering the spatial variation of the anisotropic thermal conductivity” pgs. 436-452, 2017) discloses numerical method for the thermal analysis of Ceramic Matrix Composite (CMC) turbine vane was developed considering the Anisotropic Thermal Conductivity (ATC) and its spatial variation due to the vane’s curved surface. A turbine vane with a cooling configuration was used as an example of the simulations; 3 different cases (Isotropic Thermal Conductivity (ITC), constant ATC, and ATC with spatial variation (Abstract); the procedure of the CMC turbine vane’s thermal analysis is shown in Fig. 3. First, we created the computational domain of the vane’s solid region and generated the mesh. Second, to get the spatial variation and the matrix of the ATC, the ATC of each mesh node was calculated according to the geometrical characteristics of the vane’s curved surface. Third, we carried out the CFD simulation based on the 3D computational domain, including both the solid and fluid regions (pg. 439 right side column); Due to the complex geometric characteristics of the vane, the vane’s solid region was separated into 3 parts: ① the leading edge, ② interior rib, and ③ vane body (pg. 443 left side column).
Claar et al (US Patent No. 5, 403, 790) discloses the resultant ceramic composite bodies were cross sectioned, mounted and polished for metallographic examination by a scanning electron microscope set in the back scattered electron mode (Col. 34 lines 26-29).
Kameda et al (US Patent No. 5, 939, 216) discloses n the braided fabrics to be used in the present invention, the fiber bundles 2a and the fiber bundles 2b are not rectangularly arranged with each other at an angle of 90 degrees as in the conventional plain weave, but in oblique relation to each other at a selected intersection angle of about 10 to 170 degrees as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. Consequently, as seen in FIG. 1, the braided fabric with its fiber bundles obliquely disposed is sufficiently resistant, via those oblique fiber bundles 2, to hoop stress liable to arise mainly radially or to principal stress liable to occur axially. Moreover, the braided fabric 1 can withstand stress flowing from during assembly thereof into the matrix and some stress occurring while in sintering of the resulting matrix, thus contributing greatly to improved shape retention of the braided fabric itself as well as the composite product which has desirably controlled anisotropic properties (Col. 6 lines 35-50).
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 KIBROM K GEBRESILASSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-8571. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:30 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, Rehana Perveen can be reached at 571 272 3676. 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.
KIBROM K. GEBRESILASSIE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2189
/KIBROM K GEBRESILASSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2189 03/25/2026
Prosecution Insights