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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed 05/09/2023 and 03/13/2024 fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Response to Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-19) in the reply filed on 11/14/2025 is acknowledge. Group II (claim 20) is withdrawn from consideration.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 10, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich et al. (EP 3933527 A1) in view of Sathian et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,703,044 B2).
Examiner’s Note: It is noted that the EP 3933527 A1 and the U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0294221 A1 are equivalent. Therefore, the U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0294221 A1 is used as a translation version of the EP 3933527 A1 for convenient purposes.
Regarding claim 1, Heinrich discloses a method (method as shown in Heinrich Fig.1) for providing a component (shape of the workpiece WS supposed to be present after processing by the machine tool WM1, Heinrich Par.0025 & Fig.1), comprising:
scanning a substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) using structured light (structured light from sensor system S, Heinrich Fig.1 & Par.0024) to provide substrate scan data (present shape of the workpiece WS in the first phase P1, Heinrich Fig.1 & Par.0024) (Heinrich Par.0024 discloses scanning the workpiece WS using structured light from sensor system S to provide scan data of the workpiece WS. Specifically, Par.0024 discloses: “In a first phase P1, a present shape of the workpiece WS is detected by means of a sensor system S. The sensor system S comprises one or more contactless sensors. In the present exemplary embodiment, the sensor system S in particular comprises a scanner, which acquires the present shape of the workpiece WS by means of a laser, by means of a projection of structured light, or by means of one or more cameras.”);
comparing the substrate scan data (the acquired present shape of the workpiece WS, Heinrich Par.0025) to substrate reference data (intended shape of the workpiece WS, i.e., predetermined CAD model of the workpiece WS, Heinrich Par.0025) (Heinrich Par.0025 discloses: “The acquired present shape of the workpiece WS is then compared to an intended shape of the workpiece WS, which is supposed to be present after processing by the machine tool WM1. The intended shape can be specified for this purpose in particular by a predetermined CAD model of the workpiece WS.”) to provide additive manufacturing data (additive manufacturing data is provided by comparing the present shape to the intended shape of the workpiece, Heinrich Pars.0026-0028) (To be more specific, Heinrich Par.0026 discloses if a deviation between the present shape and the intended shape of the workpiece WS is established in this comparison, the repair unit RE simulates, by means of a numeric simulation model of the workpiece WS, how it would behave in a physical aspect in the present shape; Heinrich Par.0027 discloses if no deviation from the intended shape has been established, the workpiece WS is left in the present shape and passed on to the machine tool WM2 for further processing, or the workpiece WS is output directly as a finished workpiece; and Heinrich Par.0028 discloses if the requirements are not met by the workpiece WS in the present shape, it is checked on the basis of the simulation model whether and/or to what extent the workpiece WS would meet the requirements placed after a repair by additive and/or subtractive processing.);
depositing braze powder (applying 3D printing material DM by means of the 3D printer 3DPR, Heinrich Par.0035 & Fig.1) with the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) based on the additive manufacturing data (additive manufacturing data is provided by comparing the present shape to the intended shape of the workpiece, Heinrich Pars.0026-0028 and as explained in details previously) (Heinrich discloses the step of depositing braze powder with the workpiece based on additive manufacturing data because Heinrich Par.0028 discloses if the requirements are not met by the workpiece WS in the present shape, it is checked on the basis of the simulation model whether and/or to what extent the workpiece WS would meet the requirements placed after a repair by additive and/or subtractive processing; Heinrich Par.0030 discloses on the basis of the present shape of the workpiece WS and the supplemented shape, a spatial area is ascertained which is to be filled using 3D printing material in the supplemented shape; Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “The 3D printer 3DPR is used for the additive supplementing of the workpiece WS in a second phase P2 of the repair. A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.” and Heinrich Par.0035 discloses: “In the second phase P2, the workpiece WS is enlarged at least up to the supplemented shape by applying 3D printing material DM by means of the 3D printer 3DPR.”), the braze powder (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) sintered together during the depositing of the braze powder to provide the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) with sintered braze material (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) (Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.”; therefore, Heinrich discloses the powder sintered together during the depositing of the powder to provide workpiece WS with the sintered material DM as shown in Heinrich Fig.2);
heating the sintered braze material (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) to melt the sintered braze material (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) (Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.”; therefore, Heinrich discloses heating the material DM to melt the material DM).
Heinrich does not explicitly disclose:
heating the sintered braze material to diffusion bond the sintered braze material to the substrate
Sathian teaches a method:
heating the sintered braze material diffusion bond the sintered braze material to the substrate (Sathian teaches heating the sintered braze material to diffusion bond the sintered braze material to the substrate because Sathian Claim 1 teaches: “fixedly coupling the sintered preform to at least a portion of the machine component via brazing, such that a diffusion bond is formed between the sintered preform and the machine component, wherein to fixedly couple the sintered preform, the machine component and the sintered preform is heated from room temperature to approximately 1200° F. at a rate of heat addition of approximately 25° F. per minute, and the machine component and the sintered preform are then heated at a holding temperature of approximately 1200° F. for a holding period of approximately 30 minutes”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich, by making adding heating the sintered braze material to diffusion bond the sintered braze material to the substrate, as taught by Sathian, in order to form a strong, high-integrity, solid-state bond. The final bond line becomes microstructurally similar or even identical to the parent (base) material, resulting in a joint with strength and durability. Additionally, the resulting joint maintains the original properties of the base materials, which is crucial for applications in demanding industries such as aerospace, electronics, and medical devices.
Regarding claim 4, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, Heinrich also discloses
wherein the substrate reference data (intended shape of the workpiece WS, i.e., predetermined CAD model of the workpiece WS, Heinrich Par.0025) comprises data from a design specification (predetermined CAD model of the workpiece WS, Heinrich Par.0025) for the component (intended shape of the workpiece WS, which is supposed to be present after processing by the machine tool WM1, Heinrich Par.0025) (Heinrich Par.0025 discloses: “The acquired present shape of the workpiece WS is then compared to an intended shape of the workpiece WS, which is supposed to be present after processing by the machine tool WM1. The intended shape can be specified for this purpose in particular by a predetermined CAD model of the workpiece WS.”).
Regarding claim 5, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, Heinrich also discloses
wherein the braze powder (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) is deposited with the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) to form a cladding on the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) (Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “The 3D printer 3DPR is used for the additive supplementing of the workpiece WS in a second phase P2 of the repair. A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.”, Heinrich Par.0035 discloses: “In the second phase P2, the workpiece WS is enlarged at least up to the supplemented shape by applying 3D printing material DM by means of the 3D printer 3DPR.”, and Heinrich Fig.1 – phase P2 shows the material DM is deposited with the workpiece WS to form cladding on the workpiece WS).
Regarding claim 10, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, and also teaches:
wherein the heating of the sintered braze material is performed in a vacuum furnace subsequent to the depositing of the braze powder (it is noted that Heinrich discloses the step of depositing of the braze powder, as cited and explained previously in the rejection of claim 1 above; and Sathian teaches heating of the sintered braze material, as cited, explained and incorporated in the rejection of claim 1 above; and Sathian further discloses the heating of the sintered braze material is performed in a vacuum furnace because Sathian Col.6 lines 46-61 teaches: “Method step 212 of exemplary method 200 is brazing sintered preform 402 to Z-notch mating surface 114. Step 212 includes a heating cycle sub-step and a cooling cycle sub-step. The heating cycle sub-step includes at least one rate of heat addition, at least one holding temperature and at least one holding period. In the exemplary embodiment, the heating cycle sub-step includes placing shroud 108, with preform 402 tack welded to each of its two Z-notches 110, into a brazing furnace that is at room temperature, i.e., approximately 21° Celsius (C) (70° Fahrenheit (F)). To facilitate the bonding process, a non-oxidizing atmosphere within the furnace and a method of inducing a pressure on hardface preform 402 may be provided per methods well known to practitioners of the art. To obtain a non-oxidizing atmosphere, a vacuum is formed in the furnace with a pressure of approximately 0.067 Pascal (Pa) (0.5 milliTorr) or less.”; therefore, in combination, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the heating of the sintered braze material is performed in a vacuum furnace subsequent to the depositing of the braze powder).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, by adding the teachings of the heating of the sintered braze material is performed in a vacuum furnace subsequent to the depositing of the braze powder, as taught by Sathian, in order to prevent oxidation, eliminate flux, remove trapped gases, and achieve high-density, strong, clean joints for manufactured parts because vacuum removes oxygen, stopping the braze material from forming oxides; thus, enhancing strength and corrosion resistance.
Regarding claim 16, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, Heinrich also discloses
wherein a damaged component (the present shape of the workpiece that is different from the intended shape of the workpiece, i.e., different from the a predetermined CAD model of the workpiece, Heinrich Par.0026) comprises the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) (Heinrich Pars.0026-0028 discloses comparing the present shape to the intended shape of the workpiece, Heinrich Par.0026 discloses: “If a deviation between the present shape and the intended shape of the workpiece WS is established in this comparison, the repair unit RE simulates, by means of a numeric simulation model of the workpiece WS, how it would behave in a physical aspect in the present shape”; thus, the present shape of the workpiece WS that is different from the intended shape of the workpiece WS is interpreted to be a damaged component that needs to be repaired); and
the braze powder (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) is deposited with the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) to repair the damaged component (damaged component is the present shape of the workpiece that is different from the intended shape of the workpiece, i.e., different from the a predetermined CAD model of the workpiece, Heinrich Par.0026) (Heinrich discloses the step of depositing braze powder with the workpiece to repair the damaged component because Heinrich Pars.0026 if a deviation between the present shape and the intended shape of the workpiece WS is established in the comparison, the repair unit RE simulates; Heinrich Pars.0028 discloses if the requirements are not met by the workpiece WS in the present shape, it is checked on the basis of the simulation model whether and/or to what extent the workpiece WS would meet the requirements placed after a repair by additive and/or subtractive processing; Heinrich Par.0030 discloses on the basis of the present shape of the workpiece WS and the supplemented shape, a spatial area is ascertained which is to be filled using 3D printing material in the supplemented shape; Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “The 3D printer 3DPR is used for the additive supplementing of the workpiece WS in a second phase P2 of the repair. A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.” and Heinrich Par.0035 discloses: “In the second phase P2, the workpiece WS is enlarged at least up to the supplemented shape by applying 3D printing material DM by means of the 3D printer 3DPR.”).
Claims 2-3, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich et al. (EP 3933527 A1) in view of Sathian et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,703,044 B2), and further in view of Ozturk et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0366491 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, but does not teach:
wherein the structured light comprises structured white light.
Ozturk teaches a method using system (100, Ozturk Figs.1-2):
wherein the structured light (structured light from the profiler device 230, Ozturk Fig.2) comprises structured white light (Ozturk Par.0026 teaches profiler device 230 projects structured white light to scan the object; specifically, the Ozturk Par.0026 teaches: “The inspection system 130 includes a profiler device 230 (shown in FIG. 2) that obtains a top or outer surface profile of a part (e.g., a turbomachine part, such as blades, buckets, nozzles, vanes, etc.). The profiler device 230 may be a laser profiler or a structured light profiler device. A laser profiler device may include any laser measurement device capable of measuring a two-dimensional or three-dimensional profile of a part, or a tactile profiler device or any vision based profiling device which captures two or three dimensional data about an object/part. A structured light profiler projects a one or two-dimensional pattern of light (e.g., blue light or white light) onto the part surface and the distortion of the light pattern is used to detect the surface profile of the surface of the part.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, by making the structured light comprises structured white light, as taught by Ozturk, in order to achieve high-accuracy quality control, reverse engineering, and design validation, capturing complex geometries with detailed color/texture, ensuring printed parts match digital designs (CAD), detecting deviations quickly with fast, non-contact, and precise measurements. Therefore, the quality of additive manufactured parts would be improved.
Regarding claim 3, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, but does not teach:
wherein the structured light comprises structured blue light.
Ozturk teaches a method using system (100, Ozturk Figs.1-2):
wherein the structured light (structured light from the profiler device 230, Ozturk Fig.2) comprises structured blue light (Ozturk Par.0026 teaches profiler device 230 projects structured blue light to scan the object; specifically, the Ozturk Par.0026 teaches: “The inspection system 130 includes a profiler device 230 (shown in FIG. 2) that obtains a top or outer surface profile of a part (e.g., a turbomachine part, such as blades, buckets, nozzles, vanes, etc.). The profiler device 230 may be a laser profiler or a structured light profiler device. A laser profiler device may include any laser measurement device capable of measuring a two-dimensional or three-dimensional profile of a part, or a tactile profiler device or any vision based profiling device which captures two or three dimensional data about an object/part. A structured light profiler projects a one or two-dimensional pattern of light (e.g., blue light or white light) onto the part surface and the distortion of the light pattern is used to detect the surface profile of the surface of the part.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, by making the structured light comprises structured blue light, as taught by Ozturk, in order to achieve high-accuracy, detailed 3D data quickly for complex parts, especially those that are dark or reflective, ensuring printed parts meet precise design specifications, reducing errors. Therefore, the quality of additive manufactured parts would be improved.
Regarding claim 19, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, but does not teach:
wherein the scanning of the substrate comprises projecting a pattern of white light or blue light onto the substrate.
Ozturk teaches a method using system (100, Ozturk Figs.1-2):
wherein the scanning of the substrate (parts 211, Ozturk Fig.2) comprises projecting a pattern of white light or blue light (one or two-dimensional pattern of white light or blue light projected from the profiler device 230, Ozturk Fig.2 & Par.0026) onto the substrate (parts 211, Ozturk Fig.2) (Ozturk Par.0026 teaches profiler device 230 projects structured blue light to scan the object; specifically, the Ozturk Par.0026 teaches: “The inspection system 130 includes a profiler device 230 (shown in FIG. 2) that obtains a top or outer surface profile of a part (e.g., a turbomachine part, such as blades, buckets, nozzles, vanes, etc.). The profiler device 230 may be a laser profiler or a structured light profiler device. A laser profiler device may include any laser measurement device capable of measuring a two-dimensional or three-dimensional profile of a part, or a tactile profiler device or any vision based profiling device which captures two or three dimensional data about an object/part. A structured light profiler projects a one or two-dimensional pattern of light (e.g., blue light or white light) onto the part surface and the distortion of the light pattern is used to detect the surface profile of the surface of the part.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, by adding the teaching of scanning of the substrate comprises projecting a pattern of white light or blue light onto the substrate, as taught by Ozturk, in order to achieve high-accuracy quality control, reverse engineering, and design validation, capturing complex geometries with detailed color/texture, ensuring printed parts match digital designs (CAD), detecting deviations quickly with fast, non-contact, and precise measurements. Therefore, the quality of additive manufactured parts would be improved.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich et al. (EP 3933527 A1) in view of Sathian et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,703,044 B2), and further in view of Oxford et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0037518 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, Heinrich also discloses:
sintering the braze powder using a laser beam (Heinrich discloses sintering the braze powder using a laser beam because Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “The 3D printer 3DPR is used for the additive supplementing of the workpiece WS in a second phase P2 of the repair. A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.”).
Heinrich in view of Sathian does not explicitly teaches:
wherein the depositing of the braze powder includes directing the braze powder towards the substrate through a nozzle
Oxford teaches a method (Oxford Figs.1-2):
wherein the depositing of the braze powder (powdered metal material 120, Oxford Fig.2) (Oxford Par.0030 teaches: “a fluid medium may be used to deliver the powdered metal material 120 from the one or more reservoirs through the one or more deposition nozzles 118.”) includes directing the braze powder (powdered metal material 120, Oxford Fig.2) towards the substrate (component 110, Oxford Fig.2) through a nozzle (nozzle, Oxford annotated Fig.2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
631
756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, by adding the teaching of depositing of the braze powder includes directing the braze powder towards the substrate through a nozzle, as taught by Oxford, in order to provide precise control over the powder flow, concentration, and direction, which results in a high-quality, efficient, and reliable brazed joint or coating.
Regarding claim 7, Heinrich in view of Sathian and Oxford teaches the method set forth in claim 6, Heinrich does not disclose:
wherein the laser beam is directed towards the substrate through an inner bore of the nozzle.
Oxford teaches a method (Oxford Figs.1-2):
wherein the laser beam (heat source 116 is laser beam, Oxford Fig.2 & Par.0029) is directed towards the substrate (component 110, Oxford Fig.2) through an inner bore (inner bore, Oxford annotated Fig.2 below) of the nozzle (nozzle, Oxford annotated Fig.2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
631
756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian and Oxford, by making the laser beam is directed towards the substrate through an inner bore of the nozzle, as taught by Oxford, in order to concentrate heat, melt powder at the exact spot, minimize distortion, and allow for complex geometries and repair by simultaneously delivering material and energy, leading to faster and more precise joining.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich et al. (EP 3933527 A1) in view of Sathian et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,703,044 B2), and further in view of Burbaum et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0069832 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, but does not teach:
wherein the braze powder comprises metal alloy powder and braze material powder with a lower melting point than the metal alloy powder.
Burbaum teaches a method using system (100, Burbaum Fig.1):
wherein the braze powder (braze powder includes base metal powder from powder feed system 220 and braze alloy powder from powder feed system 222, Burbaum Fig.1 & Pars.0013-0014) comprises metal alloy powder (base metal powder from powder feed system 220, Burbaum Fig.1 & Pars.0013-0014; Burbaum Par.0014 teaches the base metal powder comprises a nickel-based superalloy powder) and braze material powder (braze alloy powder from powder feed system 222, Burbaum Fig.1 & Pars.0013-0014) with a lower melting point than the metal alloy powder (base metal powder from powder feed system 220, Burbaum Fig.1 & Pars.0013-0014) (Burbaum Par.0014 teaches: “The braze alloy powder may comprise a braze material that includes a lower melting temperature than the base metal powder.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, by making braze powder comprises metal alloy powder and braze material powder with a lower melting point than the metal alloy powder, as taught by Burbaum, in order to create pastes for precise application, better flow control (sluggish/lively), high strength, joining dissimilar metals, and cost-effective, automated processes, especially for complex shapes like electronics or auto parts.
Regarding claim 9, Heinrich in view of Sathian and Burbaum teaches the method set forth in claim 1, Heinrich does not disclose:
wherein the metal alloy powder and the substrate comprise a common metal alloy.
Burbaum teaches a method using system (100, Burbaum Fig.1):
wherein the metal alloy powder (base metal powder from powder feed system 220, Burbaum Fig.1 & Pars.0013-0014) and the substrate (component 10, Burbaum Fig.1) comprise a common metal alloy (Burbaum teaches the base metal powder and the component 10 comprise a common metal alloy because Burbaum Par.0014 teaches: “The base metal powder may correspond to a base material composition of a component 10 to be laser welded.”. Additionally, Burbaum Par.0014 teaches: “the base metal powder comprises a nickel-based superalloy powder”, and Burbaum Par.0018 teaches: “the component 10 may be a nickel-based superalloy component such as a gas turbine blade or vane.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian and Burbaum, by making braze powder comprises metal alloy powder and braze material powder, as taught by Burbaum, in order to create pastes for precise application, better flow control (sluggish/lively), high strength, joining dissimilar metals, and cost-effective, automated processes, especially for complex shapes like electronics or auto parts.
Claims 11-13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich et al. (EP 3933527 A1) in view of Sathian et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,703,044 B2), and further in view of Puidokas et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0047094 A1) and Ghunakikar (WO 2019168517 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Heinrich in view of Sathian teaches the method set forth in claim 1, but does not teach further comprising:
depositing a braze slurry into a void in the substrate, the braze slurry comprising second braze powder within a liquid binder; and
heating the braze slurry within the void to melt the second braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the second braze powder within the void;
wherein the heating of the sintered braze material further heats the mass of the second braze powder and diffusion bonds the mass of the second braze powder to the substrate.
Puidokas teaches a method (Puidokas Fig.7):
depositing a braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Par.0015) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”) into a void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) in the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.2-5), the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) comprising second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within a binder (“binder”, Puidokas Par.0025) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”); and
heating the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) to melt the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and subsequently provide a mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) (the braze paste 14 is heat treated as shown in step 140 in Puidokas Fig.7, and Puidokas Par.0027 teaches heat treating of the braze paste 14 melts the braze powder, and Puidokas Par.0024 teaches uniform heating and cooling of the component in the vacuum furnace during brazing, thus, subsequently provide a mass of the braze paste 14 within the crack 13 and this is also shown in Puidokas Fig.3; specifically, Par.0027 teaches: “In step 140, the components are brazed and heat treated. The components may be put in a high vacuum furnace. The position of the parts depends on the cracks' orientation and generally the parts are positioned in the way that the weight force, combined with the capillary force, facilitates the flow of the brazing alloy in most of the cracks to be brazed. The brazing process runs in high vacuum. The furnace system will be slowly heated up to a temperature range of about 200° C. to about 400° C. During this first heating phase the binder gradually evaporates and leads to a slight shrinkage of the brazing paste. After this short dwell time meant to eliminate most of the binder, the temperature continues to gradually increase. After reaching a sufficiently high temperature to completely melt the brazing alloy and homogenize the mixture of powder, the temperature will be lowered between the liquidus and the solidus temperature.”);
wherein the heating of the sintered braze material (the heating of the sintered braze material is interpreted to be the heating of material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5 & Pars.0031-0032) further heats the mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and diffusion bonds the mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) to the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.2-5) (Puidokas teaches the heating of the material 16 by laser further heats the mass of powder in the braze paste 14 and diffusion bonds the mass of the powder in the braze paste 14 to the component 10 because Puidokas Par.0031 discloses: “The previously brazed zone should be located as near as possible to the center of the grooves to have a homogenous heat dispersion and stress distribution during the following laser wire welding process.”, and Puidokas Par.0032 teaches: “The generated heat on the molten wire is directly transferred into the base material that will be partially melted as the bonding is established. Because of the pulsing nature of the process the fused zone is limited to the laser exposed zone with limited heat input because of the fine control on the overall pulse energy, duration and intensity distribution of the laser.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, by adding the teachings of depositing braze paste into void in the substrate, the braze paste comprising second braze powder within binder; and heating the braze paste within the void to melt the second braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the second braze powder within the void; wherein the heating of the sintered braze material further heats the mass of the second braze powder and diffusion bonds the mass of the second braze powder to the substrate, as taught by Puidokas, in order to fix the crack and repair of the superalloy component because the technique combines powder and binder, allowing precise application into complex cracks, creating a strong, void-free repair that restores the component’s original properties without melting the base material, thus, it provides effectively rebuild for damaged superalloy parts with cost-effective.
Heinrich in view of Sathian and Puidokas does not explicitly teach:
the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder
Ghunakikar teaches a method of fixing a crack by braze slurry (Ghunakikar Figs.2-4):
the braze paste is braze slurry (Ghunakikar on page 6 lines 28-30 teaches: “The braze material 40 may be in any desired form such as a powder, slurry, paste, tape, wire, foil, pre-sintered preform (PSP), or the like, and combinations thereof as are all known in the art.”) and the binder is liquid binder (Ghunakikar on page 7 lines 13-14 teaches: “In certain embodiments, the braze paste 42 comprises a powder mixture being bound together using a liquid binder.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian and Puidokas, by making the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder, as taught by Ghunakikar, in order to provide a stronger, smoother repair because the slurry that is created by mixing powder with liquid binder can be drawn into tight cracks and gaps by capillary action; to be more specific, the slurry is created by mixing fine filler metal powder with certain amount of liquid binder adheres to the surface, allowing the metal particles to be drawn into the crack by capillary action, filling it and bonding when heated, providing a stronger and smoother repair.
Regarding claim 12, Heinrich in view of Sathian, Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 11, but does not teach:
wherein the braze slurry is manually deposited into the void
Ghunakikar teaches (Ghunakikar Fig.3):
wherein the braze slurry (braze slurry 42, Ghunakikar Fig.3) is manually (as shown in Ghunakikar Fig.3) deposited into the void (crack 38, Ghunakikar Fig.3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, Puidokas and Ghunakikar, by adding the teaching of the braze slurry is manually deposited into the void, as taught by Ghunakikar, in order to offer precision control over the amount and placement of material, especially for complex geometries, irregular gaps, or prototype/low-volume production. This provides better results in situations where automated systems might be insufficient.
Regarding claim 13, Heinrich in view of Sathian, Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 11, Puidokas also teaches (as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 11 above):
wherein the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) comprises metal alloy powder (“superalloy Inconel 738”, Puidokas Par.0024) and braze material powder (“AMS 4782”, Puidokas Par.0024) with a lower melting point than the metal alloy powder (AMS 4782 has lower melting point than the superalloy Inconel 738 because it is noted that the melting point of AMS 4782 is 1975°F - 2075°F [according to https://www.matweb.com/search/datasheet_print.aspx?matguid=2bf36f42254f4093a5233ed7a8d6a57b]), and the melting point of Inconel 738 is (2250°F to 2430°F [according to https://nickelinstitute.org/media/4690/ni_inco_497_alloy738.pdf]) (Puidokas Par.0024 teaches: “The braze material may be a pure braze alloy, e.g., D-15 (Balance Ni, 15% Cr, 10.25% Co, 3.5% Ta, 3.5% Al, 2.3% B), AMS 4782 (71% Ni, 19% Cr, 10% Si), DF-4B (Balance Ni, 14% Cr, 10% Co, 3.5% Al, 2.75% B, 2.5% Ta, 0.05% Y), Amdry 788 (Balance Co, 22% Cr, 21% Ni, 14% W, 2% B, 2% Si, 0.03% La) or also a mixture of brazing alloys like AMS 4782 and a powder of the superalloy Inconel 738, Inconel 625, Inconel 718, Haynes 230 (57%-Balance Ni, 22%, Cr, 14% W, 2% Mo, 3% max Fe, 5% max Co, 0.5% Mn, 0.4% Si, 0.5% max Nb, 0.3% Al, 0.1% max Ti, 0.1% C, 0.02% La, 0.015% max B), MM509B, Amdry 775, braze alloy high melt/low melt mixtures, 50% Ni/50% D15, 60% IN625/40% Amdry 788, or 50% MarM 247/50% DF-4B.”).
Regarding claim 15, Heinrich in view of Sathian, Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 11, Puidokas also teaches (as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 11 above):
wherein a cladding of the sintered braze material (top layer of the sintered material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5) covers the mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.4-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) (Puidokas Figs.4-5 shows cladding of the sintered material 16 covers the mass of powder in braze paste 14)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich et al. (EP 3933527 A1) in view of Sathian et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,703,044 B2), Puidokas et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0047094 A1), Ghunakikar (WO 2019168517 A1), and further in view of 엘리엇 et al. (KR 101898238 B1, hereinafter KR’238).
Regarding claim 14, Heinrich in view of Sathian, Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 11, and also teaches wherein the heating of the braze slurry melts the second braze powder (as cited and explained above in the rejection of claim 11)
Heinrich in view of Sathian, Puidokas and Ghunakikar does not explicitly teach:
wherein the heating of the braze slurry without diffusion bonding the second braze powder to the substrate.
KR’238 teaches:
wherein the heating of the braze paste without diffusion bonding the braze powder to the substrate (KR’238 teaches heating the braze paste without diffusion bonding the braze powder to the substrate because KR’238 Translated Document – paragraph 4 on page 23 teaches: “A sheet of aluminum or aluminum alloy metal binder or filler may be provided between the plate layers and, in some embodiments, between the shaft and the bottom plate, wherein the plate layers are joined together with a sheet of metal binder disposed therebetween . The metal binder or filler may then be heated in a vacuum to a temperature of at least 800 DEG C and cooled to a temperature below 600 DEG C so that the metal binder or filler cures to couple the plate layers together to the plate assembly and the shaft to the plate assembly Thereby creating a hermetically sealed sealing portion.”, KR’238 Translated Document – paragraph 10 on page 34 teaches: “Wherein the first ceramic plate layer and the second ceramic plate layer are bonded to each other without diffusion bonding of the aluminum brazing element”. It is noted that Heinrich in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar already teaches braze slurry and the second braze powder, which is the powder in the braze slurry, as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 11 above; therefore, in combination, Heinrich in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the heating of the braze slurry without diffusion bonding the second braze powder to the substrate)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Sathian, Puidokas and Ghunakikar, by adding the teaching of the heating of the braze slurry without diffusion bonding the second braze powder to the substrate, as taught by KR’238, in order to allow for localized melting and wetting, creating strong, leak-tight joints while preserving base metal properties, thus, joining dissimilar metals easily, and enabling complex shapes, while avoiding the high pressure and long cycles of pure diffusion bonding.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrich et al. (EP 3933527 A1) in view of Puidokas et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0047094 A1), and further in view of Ghunakikar (WO 2019168517 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Heinrich discloses a method for providing a component, comprising:
scanning a substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) using structured light (structured light from sensor system S, Heinrich Fig.1 & Par.0024) to provide substrate scan data (present shape of the workpiece WS in the first phase P1, Heinrich Fig.1 & Par.0024) (Heinrich Par.0024 discloses scanning the workpiece WS using structured light from sensor system S to provide scan data of the workpiece WS. Specifically, Par.0024 discloses: “In a first phase P1, a present shape of the workpiece WS is detected by means of a sensor system S. The sensor system S comprises one or more contactless sensors. In the present exemplary embodiment, the sensor system S in particular comprises a scanner, which acquires the present shape of the workpiece WS by means of a laser, by means of a projection of structured light, or by means of one or more cameras.”);
comparing the substrate scan data (the acquired present shape of the workpiece WS, Heinrich Par.0025) to substrate reference data (intended shape of the workpiece WS, i.e., predetermined CAD model of the workpiece WS, Heinrich Par.0025) (Heinrich Par.0025 discloses: “The acquired present shape of the workpiece WS is then compared to an intended shape of the workpiece WS, which is supposed to be present after processing by the machine tool WM1. The intended shape can be specified for this purpose in particular by a predetermined CAD model of the workpiece WS.”) to provide additive manufacturing data (additive manufacturing data is provided by comparing the present shape to the intended shape of the workpiece, Heinrich Pars.0026-0028) (To be more specific, Heinrich Par.0026 discloses if a deviation between the present shape and the intended shape of the workpiece WS is established in this comparison, the repair unit RE simulates, by means of a numeric simulation model of the workpiece WS, how it would behave in a physical aspect in the present shape; Heinrich Par.0027 discloses if no deviation from the intended shape has been established, the workpiece WS is left in the present shape and passed on to the machine tool WM2 for further processing, or the workpiece WS is output directly as a finished workpiece; and Heinrich Par.0028 discloses if the requirements are not met by the workpiece WS in the present shape, it is checked on the basis of the simulation model whether and/or to what extent the workpiece WS would meet the requirements placed after a repair by additive and/or subtractive processing.);
depositing second braze powder (applying 3D printing material DM by means of the 3D printer 3DPR, Heinrich Par.0035 & Fig.1) with the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) based on the additive manufacturing data (additive manufacturing data is provided by comparing the present shape to the intended shape of the workpiece, Heinrich Pars.0026-0028 and as explained in details previously) (Heinrich discloses the step of depositing braze powder with the workpiece based on additive manufacturing data because Heinrich Par.0028 discloses if the requirements are not met by the workpiece WS in the present shape, it is checked on the basis of the simulation model whether and/or to what extent the workpiece WS would meet the requirements placed after a repair by additive and/or subtractive processing; Heinrich Par.0030 discloses on the basis of the present shape of the workpiece WS and the supplemented shape, a spatial area is ascertained which is to be filled using 3D printing material in the supplemented shape; Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “The 3D printer 3DPR is used for the additive supplementing of the workpiece WS in a second phase P2 of the repair. A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.” and Heinrich Par.0035 discloses: “In the second phase P2, the workpiece WS is enlarged at least up to the supplemented shape by applying 3D printing material DM by means of the 3D printer 3DPR.”), the second braze powder (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) which is sintered during the depositing of the second braze powder to provide the substrate (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) with sintered braze material (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) (Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.”; therefore, Heinrich discloses the powder sintered together during the depositing of the powder to provide workpiece WS with the sintered material DM as shown in Heinrich Fig.2); and
heating the sintered braze material (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) to melt the sintered braze material (material DM, Heinrich Fig.1) (workpiece WS, Heinrich Fig.1) (Heinrich Par.0034 discloses: “A so-called powder bed method can be used for the 3D printing, for example, which is used in particular in the production or additive processing of metal components. The additive processing can also comprise laser melting and/or laser sintering here.”; therefore, Heinrich discloses heating the material DM to melt the material DM)
Heinrich does not disclose:
depositing a braze slurry into a void in the substrate, the braze slurry comprising first braze powder within a liquid binder; and
heating the braze slurry within the void to melt the first braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the first braze powder within the void;
heating the sintered braze material and the mass of the first braze powder to diffusion bond the mass of first braze powder and the sintered braze material to the substrate
Puidokas teaches a method (Puidokas Fig.7):
depositing a braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Par.0015) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”) into a void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) in the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.2-5), the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) comprising first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within a binder (“binder”, Puidokas Par.0025) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”); and
heating the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) to melt the first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and subsequently provide a mass of the first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) (the braze paste 14 is heat treated as shown in step 140 in Puidokas Fig.7, and Puidokas Par.0027 teaches heat treating of the braze paste 14 melts the braze powder, and Puidokas Par.0024 teaches uniform heating and cooling of the component in the vacuum furnace during brazing, thus, subsequently provide a mass of the braze paste 14 within the crack 13 and this is also shown in Puidokas Fig.3; specifically, Par.0027 teaches: “In step 140, the components are brazed and heat treated. The components may be put in a high vacuum furnace. The position of the parts depends on the cracks' orientation and generally the parts are positioned in the way that the weight force, combined with the capillary force, facilitates the flow of the brazing alloy in most of the cracks to be brazed. The brazing process runs in high vacuum. The furnace system will be slowly heated up to a temperature range of about 200° C. to about 400° C. During this first heating phase the binder gradually evaporates and leads to a slight shrinkage of the brazing paste. After this short dwell time meant to eliminate most of the binder, the temperature continues to gradually increase. After reaching a sufficiently high temperature to completely melt the brazing alloy and homogenize the mixture of powder, the temperature will be lowered between the liquidus and the solidus temperature.”);
heating the sintered braze material (the heating of the sintered braze material is interpreted to be the heating of material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5 & Pars.0031-0032) and the mass of the first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) to diffusion bond the mass of first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and the sintered braze material (sintered material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5) to the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.4-5) Puidokas teaches the heating of the material 16 by laser further heats the mass of powder in the braze paste 14 and diffusion bonds the mass of the powder in the braze paste 14 to the component 10 because Par.0027 discloses: “In step 140, the components are brazed and heat treated. The components may be put in a high vacuum furnace. The position of the parts depends on the cracks' orientation and generally the parts are positioned in the way that the weight force, combined with the capillary force, facilitates the flow of the brazing alloy in most of the cracks to be brazed. The brazing process runs in high vacuum. The furnace system will be slowly heated up to a temperature range of about 200° C. to about 400° C. During this first heating phase the binder gradually evaporates and leads to a slight shrinkage of the brazing paste. After this short dwell time meant to eliminate most of the binder, the temperature continues to gradually increase. After reaching a sufficiently high temperature to completely melt the brazing alloy and homogenize the mixture of powder, the temperature will be lowered between the liquidus and the solidus temperature. There during a long dwell time (e.g., >3 hours) the front of the liquid phases will be slowly shifted due to the diffusion of melting point depressant elements into the base metal. The described mechanism is generally defined as diffusion brazing or transient liquid phase brazing (TLP brazing).”, Puidokas Par.0031 discloses: “The previously brazed zone should be located as near as possible to the center of the grooves to have a homogenous heat dispersion and stress distribution during the following laser wire welding process.”, and Puidokas Par.0032 teaches: “The generated heat on the molten wire is directly transferred into the base material that will be partially melted as the bonding is established. Because of the pulsing nature of the process the fused zone is limited to the laser exposed zone with limited heat input because of the fine control on the overall pulse energy, duration and intensity distribution of the laser.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich, by adding the teachings of depositing a braze paste into a void in the substrate, the braze paste comprising first braze powder within a binder; and heating the braze paste within the void to melt the first braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the first braze powder within the void; heating the sintered braze material and the mass of the first braze powder to diffusion bond the mass of first braze powder and the sintered braze material to the substrate, as taught by Puidokas, in order to fix the crack and repair of the superalloy component because the technique combines powder and binder, allowing precise application into complex cracks, creating a strong, void-free repair that restores the component’s original properties without melting the base material, thus, it provides effectively rebuild for damaged superalloy parts with cost-effective.
Heinrich in view of Puidokas does not explicitly teach:
the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder
Ghunakikar teaches a method of fixing a crack by braze slurry (Ghunakikar Figs.2-4):
the braze paste is braze slurry (Ghunakikar on page 6 lines 28-30 teaches: “The braze material 40 may be in any desired form such as a powder, slurry, paste, tape, wire, foil, pre-sintered preform (PSP), or the like, and combinations thereof as are all known in the art.”) and the binder is liquid binder (Ghunakikar on page 7 lines 13-14 teaches: “In certain embodiments, the braze paste 42 comprises a powder mixture being bound together using a liquid binder.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrich in view of Puidokas, by making the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder, as taught by Ghunakikar, in order to provide a stronger, smoother repair because the slurry that is created by mixing powder with liquid binder can be drawn into tight cracks and gaps by capillary action; to be more specific, the slurry is created by mixing fine filler metal powder with certain amount of liquid binder adheres to the surface, allowing the metal particles to be drawn into the crack by capillary action, filling it and bonding when heated, providing a stronger and smoother repair.
Regarding claim 18, Heinrich in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 17, and also teaches (as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 17 above):
wherein the sintered second braze forms a cladding over the mass of the first braze powder and the substrate (in combination, Heinrich in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the sintered second braze forms a cladding over the mass of the first braze powder and the substrate because Heinrich Fig.1 shows the top layer forms a cladding over the entire substrate, and since the mass of the first braze powder is within the substrate [see braze paste 14 in Puidokas Figs.4-5, as cited and incorporated in the rejections of claim 17 above]; therefore, in combination, Heinrich in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the sintered second braze forms a cladding over the mass of the first braze powder and the substrate).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10, 16, 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Instant Application # 17/942,062
U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2
1. A method for providing a component, comprising:
scanning a substrate using structured light to provide substrate scan data;
comparing the substrate scan data to substrate reference data to provide additive manufacturing data;
depositing braze powder with the substrate based on the additive manufacturing data, the braze powder sintered together during the depositing of the braze powder to provide the substrate with sintered braze material; and
heating the sintered braze material to melt the sintered braze material and diffusion bond the sintered braze material to the substrate.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the structured light comprises structured white light.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the structured light comprises structured blue light.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the substrate reference data comprises data from a design specification for the component.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the braze powder is deposited with the substrate to form a cladding on the substrate.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the depositing of the braze powder includes
directing the braze powder towards the substrate through a nozzle; and
sintering the braze powder using a laser beam.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the laser beam is directed towards the substrate through an inner bore of the nozzle.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the braze powder comprises metal alloy powder and braze material powder with a lower melting point than the metal alloy powder.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the metal alloy powder and the substrate comprise a common metal alloy.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the heating of the sintered braze material is performed in a vacuum furnace subsequent to the depositing of the braze powder.
16. The method of claim 1, wherein
a damaged component comprises the substrate; and
the braze powder is deposited with the substrate to repair the damaged component.
19. The method of claim 1, wherein the scanning of the substrate comprises projecting a pattern of white light or blue light onto the substrate.
1. A method for providing a component, comprising:
additively depositing braze powder with a substrate, the braze powder sintered together during the depositing of the braze powder to provide the substrate with sintered braze material;
heating the sintered braze material to melt the sintered braze material and diffusion bond the sintered braze material to the substrate to provide braze filler material;
scanning a first object using structured light to provide first object scan data, the first object comprising the substrate and the braze filler material diffusion bonded to the substrate;
comparing the first object scan data to first object reference data to provide machining data; and
machining the first object using the machining data to provide a second object.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the structured light comprises structured white light.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the structures light comprises structured blue light.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the braze powder is deposited using an additive manufacturing device.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
scanning the substrate using structured light to provide substrate scan data;
comparing the substrate scan data to substrate reference data to provide additive manufacturing data; and
the braze powder deposited with the substrate based on the additive manufacturing data.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the substrate reference data comprises data from a design specification for the component.
7. The method of claim 5, wherein the first object reference data comprises the substrate scan data.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the depositing of the braze powder includes
directing the braze powder towards the substrate through a nozzle; and
sintering the braze powder using a laser beam.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the laser beam is directed towards the substrate through an inner bore of the nozzle.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the machining removes some of the braze filler material diffusion bonded to the substrate.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein the braze powder comprises metal alloy powder and braze material powder with a lower melting point than the metal alloy powder.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein the metal alloy powder and the substrate comprises a common metal alloy.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein the heating of the sintered braze material is performed in a vacuum furnace subsequent to the depositing of the braze powder.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the braze powder is deposited with the substrate to form a cladding over the substrate.
15. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a damaged component previously installed within an engine; and
the depositing, the heating and the machining performed to repair the damaged component to provide the component.
16. The method of claim 1, further comprising depositing a coating on the second object.
17. A method for providing a component, comprising:
scanning a substrate using a structured light device to provide substrate scan data;
comparing the substrate scan data to substrate reference data to provide additive manufacturing data;
depositing braze powder with the substrate using an additive manufacturing device based on the additive manufacturing data, the braze powder sintered to provide the substrate with sintered braze material;
heating the sintered braze material to melt the sintered braze material and diffusion bond the sintered braze material to the substrate to provide braze filler material;
scanning a first object using the structured light device to provide first object scan data, the first object comprising the substrate and the braze filler material diffusion bonded to the substrate;
comparing the first object scan data to first object reference data to provide machining data; and
machining the first object using the machining data to provide a second object.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein the substrate reference data comprises data from a specification for the component.
19. The method of claim 17, wherein the first object reference data comprises the substrate scan data.
20. A system for providing a component comprising a substrate, the system comprising:
a scanning device configured to scan the substrate using structured light to provide substrate scan data indicative of one or more characteristics of the substrate, and the scanning device further configured to scan a first object using the structured light to provide first object scan data indicative of one or more characteristics of the first object;
a controller configured to compare the substrate scan data to substrate reference data to provide additive manufacturing data, and the controller configured to compare the first object scan data to first object reference data to provide machining data;
an additive manufacturing device configured to deposit braze powder with the substrate based on the additive manufacturing data, the braze powder sintered using a laser of the additive manufacturing device during the depositing of the braze powder to provide the substrate with sintered braze material;
a furnace configured to melt the sintered braze material to facilitate diffusion bonding of the sintered braze material to the substrate to provide the first object; and
a machining device configured to machine the first object based on the machining data.
Claims 11-15, 17-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0047094 A1) and Ghunakikar (WO 2019168517 A1).
Regarding claim 11, U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 discloses the method set forth in claim 1, but does not teach further comprising:
depositing a braze slurry into a void in the substrate, the braze slurry comprising second braze powder within a liquid binder; and
heating the braze slurry within the void to melt the second braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the second braze powder within the void;
wherein the heating of the sintered braze material further heats the mass of the second braze powder and diffusion bonds the mass of the second braze powder to the substrate.
Puidokas teaches a method (Puidokas Fig.7):
depositing a braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Par.0015) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”) into a void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) in the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.2-5), the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) comprising second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within a binder (“binder”, Puidokas Par.0025) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”); and
heating the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) to melt the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and subsequently provide a mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) (the braze paste 14 is heat treated as shown in step 140 in Puidokas Fig.7, and Puidokas Par.0027 teaches heat treating of the braze paste 14 melts the braze powder, and Puidokas Par.0024 teaches uniform heating and cooling of the component in the vacuum furnace during brazing, thus, subsequently provide a mass of the braze paste 14 within the crack 13 and this is also shown in Puidokas Fig.3; specifically, Par.0027 teaches: “In step 140, the components are brazed and heat treated. The components may be put in a high vacuum furnace. The position of the parts depends on the cracks' orientation and generally the parts are positioned in the way that the weight force, combined with the capillary force, facilitates the flow of the brazing alloy in most of the cracks to be brazed. The brazing process runs in high vacuum. The furnace system will be slowly heated up to a temperature range of about 200° C. to about 400° C. During this first heating phase the binder gradually evaporates and leads to a slight shrinkage of the brazing paste. After this short dwell time meant to eliminate most of the binder, the temperature continues to gradually increase. After reaching a sufficiently high temperature to completely melt the brazing alloy and homogenize the mixture of powder, the temperature will be lowered between the liquidus and the solidus temperature.”);
wherein the heating of the sintered braze material (the heating of the sintered braze material is interpreted to be the heating of material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5 & Pars.0031-0032) further heats the mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and diffusion bonds the mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) to the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.2-5) (Puidokas teaches the heating of the material 16 by laser further heats the mass of powder in the braze paste 14 and diffusion bonds the mass of the powder in the braze paste 14 to the component 10 because Puidokas Par.0031 discloses: “The previously brazed zone should be located as near as possible to the center of the grooves to have a homogenous heat dispersion and stress distribution during the following laser wire welding process.”, and Puidokas Par.0032 teaches: “The generated heat on the molten wire is directly transferred into the base material that will be partially melted as the bonding is established. Because of the pulsing nature of the process the fused zone is limited to the laser exposed zone with limited heat input because of the fine control on the overall pulse energy, duration and intensity distribution of the laser.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2, by adding the teachings of depositing braze paste into void in the substrate, the braze paste comprising second braze powder within binder; and heating the braze paste within the void to melt the second braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the second braze powder within the void; wherein the heating of the sintered braze material further heats the mass of the second braze powder and diffusion bonds the mass of the second braze powder to the substrate, as taught by Puidokas, in order to fix the crack and repair of the superalloy component because the technique combines powder and binder, allowing precise application into complex cracks, creating a strong, void-free repair that restores the component’s original properties without melting the base material, thus, it provides effectively rebuild for damaged superalloy parts with cost-effective.
U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas does not explicitly teach:
the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder
Ghunakikar teaches a method of fixing a crack by braze slurry (Ghunakikar Figs.2-4):
the braze paste is braze slurry (Ghunakikar on page 6 lines 28-30 teaches: “The braze material 40 may be in any desired form such as a powder, slurry, paste, tape, wire, foil, pre-sintered preform (PSP), or the like, and combinations thereof as are all known in the art.”) and the binder is liquid binder (Ghunakikar on page 7 lines 13-14 teaches: “In certain embodiments, the braze paste 42 comprises a powder mixture being bound together using a liquid binder.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas, by making the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder, as taught by Ghunakikar, in order to provide a stronger, smoother repair because the slurry that is created by mixing powder with liquid binder can be drawn into tight cracks and gaps by capillary action; to be more specific, the slurry is created by mixing fine filler metal powder with certain amount of liquid binder adheres to the surface, allowing the metal particles to be drawn into the crack by capillary action, filling it and bonding when heated, providing a stronger and smoother repair.
Regarding claim 12, U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 11, but does not teach:
wherein the braze slurry is manually deposited into the void
Ghunakikar teaches (Ghunakikar Fig.3):
wherein the braze slurry (braze slurry 42, Ghunakikar Fig.3) is manually (as shown in Ghunakikar Fig.3) deposited into the void (crack 38, Ghunakikar Fig.3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar, by adding the teaching of the braze slurry is manually deposited into the void, as taught by Ghunakikar, in order to offer precision control over the amount and placement of material, especially for complex geometries, irregular gaps, or prototype/low-volume production. This provides better results in situations where automated systems might be insufficient.
Regarding claim 13, U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 11, Puidokas also teaches (as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 11 above):
wherein the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) comprises metal alloy powder (“superalloy Inconel 738”, Puidokas Par.0024) and braze material powder (“AMS 4782”, Puidokas Par.0024) with a lower melting point than the metal alloy powder (AMS 4782 has lower melting point than the superalloy Inconel 738 because it is noted that the melting point of AMS 4782 is 1975°F - 2075°F [according to https://www.matweb.com/search/datasheet_print.aspx?matguid=2bf36f42254f4093a5233ed7a8d6a57b]), and the melting point of Inconel 738 is (2250°F to 2430°F [according to https://nickelinstitute.org/media/4690/ni_inco_497_alloy738.pdf]) (Puidokas Par.0024 teaches: “The braze material may be a pure braze alloy, e.g., D-15 (Balance Ni, 15% Cr, 10.25% Co, 3.5% Ta, 3.5% Al, 2.3% B), AMS 4782 (71% Ni, 19% Cr, 10% Si), DF-4B (Balance Ni, 14% Cr, 10% Co, 3.5% Al, 2.75% B, 2.5% Ta, 0.05% Y), Amdry 788 (Balance Co, 22% Cr, 21% Ni, 14% W, 2% B, 2% Si, 0.03% La) or also a mixture of brazing alloys like AMS 4782 and a powder of the superalloy Inconel 738, Inconel 625, Inconel 718, Haynes 230 (57%-Balance Ni, 22%, Cr, 14% W, 2% Mo, 3% max Fe, 5% max Co, 0.5% Mn, 0.4% Si, 0.5% max Nb, 0.3% Al, 0.1% max Ti, 0.1% C, 0.02% La, 0.015% max B), MM509B, Amdry 775, braze alloy high melt/low melt mixtures, 50% Ni/50% D15, 60% IN625/40% Amdry 788, or 50% MarM 247/50% DF-4B.”).
Regarding claim 15, U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 11, Puidokas also teaches (as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 11 above):
wherein a cladding of the sintered braze material (top layer of the sintered material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5) covers the mass of the second braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.4-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) (Puidokas Figs.4-5 shows cladding of the sintered material 16 covers the mass of powder in braze paste 14)
Regarding claim 17, U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 discloses a method for providing a component (see Claims 17 & 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2), comprising:
scanning a substrate using structured light to provide substrate scan data (see Claims 17 & 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2);
comparing the substrate scan data to substrate reference data to provide additive manufacturing data (see Claims 17 & 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2);
depositing second braze powder on the substrate based on the additive manufacturing data, the second braze powder which is sintered during the depositing of the second braze powder to provide the substrate with sintered braze material (see Claims 17 & 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2);
U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 does not disclose
depositing a braze slurry into a void in the substrate, the braze slurry comprising first braze powder within a liquid binder; and
heating the braze slurry within the void to melt the first braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the first braze powder within the void;
heating the sintered braze material and the mass of the first braze powder to diffusion bond the mass of first braze powder and the sintered braze material to the substrate
Puidokas teaches a method (Puidokas Fig.7):
depositing a braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Par.0015) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”) into a void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) in the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.2-5), the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) comprising first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within a binder (“binder”, Puidokas Par.0025) (Puidokas Par.0025 teaches: “The brazing alloy may be mixed with binders (e.g., between 8% and 12%) and then applied on the top of the crack. In case of wide cracks, a second layer of brazing paste may be applied on top of the first layer of brazing paste.”); and
heating the braze paste (braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) to melt the first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and subsequently provide a mass of the first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) within the void (crack 13, Puidokas Fig.2) (the braze paste 14 is heat treated as shown in step 140 in Puidokas Fig.7, and Puidokas Par.0027 teaches heat treating of the braze paste 14 melts the braze powder, and Puidokas Par.0024 teaches uniform heating and cooling of the component in the vacuum furnace during brazing, thus, subsequently provide a mass of the braze paste 14 within the crack 13 and this is also shown in Puidokas Fig.3; specifically, Par.0027 teaches: “In step 140, the components are brazed and heat treated. The components may be put in a high vacuum furnace. The position of the parts depends on the cracks' orientation and generally the parts are positioned in the way that the weight force, combined with the capillary force, facilitates the flow of the brazing alloy in most of the cracks to be brazed. The brazing process runs in high vacuum. The furnace system will be slowly heated up to a temperature range of about 200° C. to about 400° C. During this first heating phase the binder gradually evaporates and leads to a slight shrinkage of the brazing paste. After this short dwell time meant to eliminate most of the binder, the temperature continues to gradually increase. After reaching a sufficiently high temperature to completely melt the brazing alloy and homogenize the mixture of powder, the temperature will be lowered between the liquidus and the solidus temperature.”);
heating the sintered braze material (the heating of the sintered braze material is interpreted to be the heating of material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5 & Pars.0031-0032) and the mass of the first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) to diffusion bond the mass of first braze powder (powder in braze paste 14, Puidokas Figs.3-5 & Pars.0015, 0025) and the sintered braze material (sintered material 16, Puidokas Figs.4-5) to the substrate (component 10, Puidokas Figs.4-5) Puidokas teaches the heating of the material 16 by laser further heats the mass of powder in the braze paste 14 and diffusion bonds the mass of the powder in the braze paste 14 to the component 10 because Par.0027 discloses: “In step 140, the components are brazed and heat treated. The components may be put in a high vacuum furnace. The position of the parts depends on the cracks' orientation and generally the parts are positioned in the way that the weight force, combined with the capillary force, facilitates the flow of the brazing alloy in most of the cracks to be brazed. The brazing process runs in high vacuum. The furnace system will be slowly heated up to a temperature range of about 200° C. to about 400° C. During this first heating phase the binder gradually evaporates and leads to a slight shrinkage of the brazing paste. After this short dwell time meant to eliminate most of the binder, the temperature continues to gradually increase. After reaching a sufficiently high temperature to completely melt the brazing alloy and homogenize the mixture of powder, the temperature will be lowered between the liquidus and the solidus temperature. There during a long dwell time (e.g., >3 hours) the front of the liquid phases will be slowly shifted due to the diffusion of melting point depressant elements into the base metal. The described mechanism is generally defined as diffusion brazing or transient liquid phase brazing (TLP brazing).”, Puidokas Par.0031 discloses: “The previously brazed zone should be located as near as possible to the center of the grooves to have a homogenous heat dispersion and stress distribution during the following laser wire welding process.”, and Puidokas Par.0032 teaches: “The generated heat on the molten wire is directly transferred into the base material that will be partially melted as the bonding is established. Because of the pulsing nature of the process the fused zone is limited to the laser exposed zone with limited heat input because of the fine control on the overall pulse energy, duration and intensity distribution of the laser.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2, by adding the teachings of depositing a braze paste into a void in the substrate, the braze paste comprising first braze powder within a binder; and heating the braze paste within the void to melt the first braze powder and subsequently provide a mass of the first braze powder within the void; heating the sintered braze material and the mass of the first braze powder to diffusion bond the mass of first braze powder and the sintered braze material to the substrate, as taught by Puidokas, in order to fix the crack and repair of the superalloy component because the technique combines powder and binder, allowing precise application into complex cracks, creating a strong, void-free repair that restores the component’s original properties without melting the base material, thus, it provides effectively rebuild for damaged superalloy parts with cost-effective.
U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas does not explicitly teach:
the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder
Ghunakikar teaches a method of fixing a crack by braze slurry (Ghunakikar Figs.2-4):
the braze paste is braze slurry (Ghunakikar on page 6 lines 28-30 teaches: “The braze material 40 may be in any desired form such as a powder, slurry, paste, tape, wire, foil, pre-sintered preform (PSP), or the like, and combinations thereof as are all known in the art.”) and the binder is liquid binder (Ghunakikar on page 7 lines 13-14 teaches: “In certain embodiments, the braze paste 42 comprises a powder mixture being bound together using a liquid binder.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas, by making the braze paste is braze slurry and the binder is liquid binder, as taught by Ghunakikar, in order to provide a stronger, smoother repair because the slurry that is created by mixing powder with liquid binder can be drawn into tight cracks and gaps by capillary action; to be more specific, the slurry is created by mixing fine filler metal powder with certain amount of liquid binder adheres to the surface, allowing the metal particles to be drawn into the crack by capillary action, filling it and bonding when heated, providing a stronger and smoother repair.
Regarding claim 18, U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the method as set forth in claim 17, and also teaches (as cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 17 above):
wherein the sintered second braze forms a cladding over the mass of the first braze powder and the substrate (in combination, U.S. Patent No. 12,358,232 B2 in view of Puidokas and Ghunakikar teaches the sintered second braze forms a cladding over the mass of the first braze powder and the substrate).
Conclusion
The following prior art(s) made of record and not relied upon is/are considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Messelling (U.S. Patent No. 6,283,356 B1) discloses a method for repairing a recess in an article surface comprises providing first and second metallic powders.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAO TRAN-LE whose telephone number is (571)272-7535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:00 EST.
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, HELENA KOSANOVIC can be reached on (571) 272-9059. 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.
/THAO UYEN TRAN-LE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 01/10/2026