DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 6, 10, 13, 15, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub. No.: US 2021/0108597 A1 (Ostdiek) in view of Pub. No.: US 2012/0093642 A1 (Nilsson) and FR 2925016 A1 (Chouard).
Regarding claim 1, Ostdiek discloses (see fig. 1 below) a gas turbine engine 10 having an unducted primary fan 20 (this is consistent with applicant par. 28), the gas turbine engine 10 comprising an aft frame (see fig. 1 below); a forward frame (see fig. 1 below) disposed upstream from the aft frame.
PNG
media_image1.png
679
975
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (forward frame)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (aft frame)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (aft frame)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (forward frame)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
Ostdiek does not explicitly disclose the forward frame including an outer ring having an inner surface radially spaced from an outer surface, a first indention defined in the outer surface, a first engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the first indention, a second indention defined along the outer surface of the outer ring, and a second engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the second indention, wherein the forward frame further includes an inner ring having an outer surface circumferentially surrounded by the outer ring, wherein a flow channel is defined between the outer surface of the inner ring and the inner surface of the outer ring, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention and at the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel, wherein the forward frame further includes a plurality of struts that extend radially from the outer surface of the inner ring to the inner surface of the outer ring within the flow channel, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a first strut of the plurality of struts, and the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a second strut of the plurality of struts, and wherein the outer ring only includes two indentions and two engine mount flanges.
Nilsson teaches (see figs. 1-3) a gas turbine engine 1, the gas turbine engine comprising: a similar forward frame (15 in fig. 2 and 38 in fig. 3; see par. 50 pointing out structure 38 of fig. 3 can correspond to a cross section of frame 15 in fig. 2; see par. 44, bottom pointing out the structure 15 is a frame wherein par. 45 and fig. 1 teach that the frame 15 is coupled to forward mounts 24, and thus 15 is a forward frame), the forward frame including an outer ring 20 (see fig. 2) having an inner surface (at 46 in fig. 2) radially spaced from an outer surface (at 20 in fig. 2), a first indention (one of three indentations 30 in each of figs. 2 and 3) defined in the outer surface, and a first engine mount flange 39 protruding radially outwardly from the first indention, a second indention (there are three indentations 30) defined along the outer surface of the outer ring and a second engine mount flange 39 protruding radially outwardly from the second indention, wherein the forward frame (15 in fig. 2 or 38 in fig. 3) further comprises an inner ring 28 including an outer surface (at 28 in fig. 2) circumferentially surrounded by the outer ring 20 (see fig. 2), wherein a flow channel (18 in fig. 2) is defined between the outer surface of the inner ring 28 and the inner surface of the outer ring 20, and wherein the inner surface of the outer ring 20 at the first indention (one of three indentations 30) and at the second indention (another of three indentations 30) extends radially inward into the flow channel (see figs. 2 and 3), wherein the forward frame further includes a plurality of struts 22 that extend radially from the outer surface (at 28 in fig. 2) of the inner ring 28 to the inner surface (at 46 in fig. 2) of the outer ring 20 within the flow channel 18, wherein the inner surface (at 46 in fig. 2) of the outer ring 20 (see fig. 2) at the first indention (see annotated figure below) extends radially inward into the flow channel 18 (see fig. 2) at opposing sides of a first strut of the plurality of struts (see annotated figure below for example showing radially inward feature regarding the second indentation), and the second indention (see annotated figure below) extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a second strut of the plurality of struts (see slanting of indentation 30 on either side of three top struts 32 in fig. 3; also see annotated figure below), and wherein the outer ring includes two indentations 30 and two mount flanges 47.
PNG
media_image3.png
262
599
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (inner surface of outer ring 20 extends radially inward to flow channel 18 regarding second indentation; also see fig. 2)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first indentation)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (expanded portion of fig. 3)][AltContent: textbox (first strut)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (second strut)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first engine mount flange 39)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (second engine mount flange 39)][AltContent: arrow]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Ostdiek with the forward frame including an outer ring having an inner surface radially spaced from an outer surface, a first indention defined in the outer surface, a first engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the first indention, a second indention defined along the outer surface of the outer ring, and a second engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the second indention, wherein the forward frame further includes an inner ring having an outer surface circumferentially surrounded by the outer ring, wherein a flow channel is defined between the outer surface of the inner ring and the inner surface of the outer ring, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention and at the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel, wherein the forward frame further includes a plurality of struts that extend radially from the outer surface of the inner ring to the inner surface of the outer ring within the flow channel, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a first strut of the plurality of struts, and the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a second strut of the plurality of struts, and wherein the outer ring includes two indentations and two mount flanges as taught by Nilsson in order to facilitate attaching the gas turbine engine to a wing of the aircraft of Ostdiek discussed in par. 42 (see Nilsson par. 6). The Ostdiek in view Nilsson combination does not teach the outer ring only includes two indentions and two engine mount flanges.
Chouard teaches (see figs. 1, 6 and 7) a gas turbine engine 1 and further teaches an outer ring (the outer ring 34 is identified in fig. 3 and shown in fig. 6) only includes two engine mount flanges 31,32 (see figs. 6-7). Chouard teaches that front mounting structures of gas turbine engines need be coupled at only two locations between a pylon 9 and the engine outer ring. It is further noted that “Omission of an Element and Its Function Is Obvious if the Function of the Element Is Not Desired” (MPEP 2144.04 II.A.). In this case omitting one of the three engine mount flanges of the combination would be desired because this would result in less engine weight and thus improved fuel efficiency. It is further noted that one of ordinary skill is knowledgeable regarding (1) additional “only two flange” mounting configurations and (2) that the number of mounting flanges can vary regarding front engine mounts, as pointed out in the Pertinent Prior Art of the non-final office action mailed 04/04/2025.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Ostdiek in view of Nilsson with the outer ring only includes two indentions and two engine mount flanges. There would be only two indentations in the combination because the third indentation would not be needed given that there are only two engine mount flanges regarding the combination. Omitting the third indention would result in ease of manufacturing and reduced drag in flow channel 18 in Nilsson fig. 2.
Regarding claim 13, Ostdiek discloses (see fig. 1 above) an aircraft (see par. 36), comprising: a wing (see par. 42); and a gas turbine engine 10 having an unducted primary fan 20, the gas turbine engine 10 comprising a forward frame (see annotated fig. 1 above). Ostdiek does not explicitly disclose the wing including a mounting pylon; the forward frame including an outer ring having an inner surface radially spaced from an outer surface, a first indention defined in the outer surface, and a first engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the first indention, wherein the first engine mount flange is coupled to the pylon, and wherein the outer ring further includes a second indention defined along the outer surface of the outer ring and a second engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the second indention, wherein the forward frame further includes an inner ring having an outer surface circumferentially surrounded by the outer ring, wherein a flow channel is defined between the outer surface of the inner ring and the inner surface of the outer ring, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention and at the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel, wherein the forward frame further includes a plurality of struts that extend radially from the outer surface of the inner ring to the inner surface of the outer ring within the flow channel, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a first strut of the plurality of struts, and the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a second strut of the plurality of struts, and wherein the outer ring only includes two indentions and two engine mount flanges.
Nilsson teaches (see figs. 1-3) a gas turbine engine 1, the gas turbine engine comprising: a similar forward frame (15 in fig. 2 and 38 in fig. 3; see par. 50 pointing out structure 38 of fig. 3 can correspond to a cross section of frame 15 in fig. 2; see par. 44, bottom pointing out the structure 15 is a frame wherein par. 45 and fig. 1 teach that the frame 15 is coupled to forward mounts 24, and thus 15 is a forward frame), the forward frame including an outer ring 20 (see fig. 2) having an inner surface (at 46 in fig. 2) radially spaced from an outer surface (at 20 in fig. 2), a first indention (one of three indentations 30 in each of figs. 2 and 3) defined in the outer surface, and a first engine mount flange 39 protruding radially outwardly from the first indention, a second indention (there are three indentations 30) defined along the outer surface of the outer ring and a second engine mount flange 39 protruding radially outwardly from the second indention, wherein the forward frame (15 in fig. 2 or 38 in fig. 3) further comprises an inner ring 28 including an outer surface (at 28 in fig. 2) circumferentially surrounded by the outer ring 20 (see fig. 2), wherein a flow channel (18 in fig. 2) is defined between the outer surface of the inner ring 28 and the inner surface of the outer ring 20, and wherein the inner surface of the outer ring 20 at the first indention (one of three indentations 30) and at the second indention (another of three indentations 30) extends radially inward into the flow channel (see figs. 2 and 3), wherein the forward frame further includes a plurality of struts 22 that extend radially from the outer surface (at 28 in fig. 2) of the inner ring 28 to the inner surface (at 46 in fig. 2) of the outer ring 20 within the flow channel 18, wherein the inner surface (at 46 in fig. 2) of the outer ring 20 (see fig. 2) at the first indention (see annotated figure above) extends radially inward into the flow channel 18 (see fig. 2) at opposing sides of a first strut of the plurality of struts (see annotated figure above for example showing radially inward feature regarding the second indentation), and the second indention (see annotated figure above) extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a second strut of the plurality of struts (see slanting of indentation 30 on either side of three top struts 32 in fig. 3; also see annotated figure above), and wherein the outer ring includes two indentations 30 and two mount flanges 47.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Ostdiek with the forward frame including an outer ring having an inner surface radially spaced from an outer surface, a first indention defined in the outer surface, a first engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the first indention, a second indention defined along the outer surface of the outer ring, and a second engine mount flange protruding radially outwardly from the second indention, wherein the forward frame further includes an inner ring having an outer surface circumferentially surrounded by the outer ring, wherein a flow channel is defined between the outer surface of the inner ring and the inner surface of the outer ring, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention and at the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel, wherein the forward frame further includes a plurality of struts that extend radially from the outer surface of the inner ring to the inner surface of the outer ring within the flow channel, wherein the inner surface of the outer ring at the first indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a first strut of the plurality of struts, and the second indention extends radially inward into the flow channel at opposing sides of a second strut of the plurality of struts, and wherein the outer ring includes two indentations and two mount flanges as taught by Nilsson in order to facilitate attaching the gas turbine engine to a wing of the aircraft of Ostdiek discussed in par. 42 (see Nilsson par. 6). The Ostdiek in view Nilsson combination does not teach the outer ring only includes two indentions and two engine mount flanges.
Chouard teaches (see figs. 1, 6 and 7) a gas turbine engine 1 and further teaches an outer ring (the outer ring 34 is identified in fig. 3 and shown in fig. 6) only includes two engine mount flanges 31,32 (see figs. 6-7). Chouard teaches that front mounting structures of gas turbine engines need be coupled at only two locations between a pylon 9 and the engine outer ring. It is further noted that “Omission of an Element and Its Function Is Obvious if the Function of the Element Is Not Desired” (MPEP 2144.04 II.A.). In this case omitting one of the three engine mount flanges of the combination would be desired because this would result in less engine weight and thus improved fuel efficiency. It is further noted that one of ordinary skill is knowledgeable regarding (1) additional “only two flange” mounting configurations and (2) that the number of mounting flanges can vary regarding front engine mounts, as pointed out in the Pertinent Prior Art of the non-final office action mailed 04/04/2025.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Ostdiek in view of Nilsson with the outer ring only includes two indentions and two engine mount flanges. There would be only two indentations in the combination because the third indentation would not be needed given that there are only two engine mount flanges regarding the combination. Omitting the third indention would result in ease of manufacturing and reduced drag in flow channel 18 in Nilsson fig. 2.
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Ostdiek in view Nilsson and Chouard teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Ostdiek further discloses (see fig. 1) (claims 3 and 15) gas turbine engine 10 is a three-stream gas turbine engine (see par. 43, bottom).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Ostdiek in view Nilsson and Chouard teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Ostdiek further discloses (claims 5 and 17) the forward frame includes an upstream end axially spaced from a downstream end, wherein the flow channel converges between the upstream end and the downstream end (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
137
239
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (forward frame)][AltContent: textbox (upstream end)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Downstream end)][AltContent: textbox (flow channel with claimed divergence)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (expanded portion of Ostdiek fig. 1)]
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Ostdiek in view Nilsson and Chouard teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. The teachings of Nilsson combined with Ostdiek in the claims 1 and 13 analysis above include (see figs. 2 and 3) (claims 6 and 18) the inner surface (at 46 in fig. 2) of the outer ring 20 at the first indention extends radially inward into the flow channel (see figs. 2 and 3 wherein walls 37 at indentation 30 extend into flow channel portion 18). This is also discussed in the Response to Arguments section of the non-final rejection mailed 04/04/2025.
Regarding claim 10, Ostdiek in view Nilsson and Chouard teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. The teachings of Nilsson combined with Ostdiek in the claim 1 analysis above include (see figs. 2 and 3) wherein the second indention (one of the three indentations 30 in fig. 3) and the second engine mount flange 39 are circumferentially spaced from the first indention (another of the three indentations 30 in fig. 3) and the first engine mount flange 39.
Claim(s) 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ostdiek in view of Nilsson and Chouard as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Pub. No. US 2003/0025033 A1 (Levert) and Pub. No. US 2014/0084129 A1 (Sandy).
Regarding claim 12, Ostdiek in view of Nilsson and Chouard teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Ostdiek does not disclose wherein three linkage flanges extend radially outwardly from the first engine mount flange, and wherein three T-shaped flanges extend radially outwardly from the second engine mount flange.
Levert teaches (see fig. 1) an aircraft engine (see title) and further teaches two linkage flanges 20a,20b extend radially outwardly from a first engine mount flange 34, and wherein two T-shaped (see annotated figure below) flanges 22 extend radially outwardly from a second engine mount flange 36.
PNG
media_image7.png
419
670
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (T-shaped flange 22)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Ostdiek in view of Nilsson and Chouard with wherein two linkage flanges extend radially outwardly from the first engine mount flange, and wherein two T-shaped flanges extend radially outwardly from the second engine mount flange as taught by Levert in order to facilitate improved structural reliability (see Levert par. 14).
It is further noted that Sandy teaches the general concept that there can be two flanges (see annotated figures below) extending radially outward from an engine (see gas turbine engine at 12 in fig. 1) mount flange 26,28,30 or three flanges (see annotated figures below) extending radially outward from an engine mount flange 28,30. It has been held in re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), “the duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced” (see MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.).
PNG
media_image9.png
392
554
media_image9.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (three flanges extending radially outward)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (two flanges extending radially outward)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to duplicate a linkage flange of Ostdiek in view of Nilsson, Chouard and Levert and to duplicate a T-shaped linkage flange of Ostdiek in view of Nilsson, Chouard and Levert because there is no information on record regarding a new and unexpected result being produced by use of Applicant’s third linkage flange and third T-shaped flange.
Regarding claim 20, Ostdiek in view Nilsson and Chouard teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. The teachings of Nilsson combined with Ostdiek in the claim 13 analysis above include (see figs. 2 and 3) wherein the second indention (see annotated figure above) and the second engine mount flange (see annotated figure above) are circumferentially spaced from the first indention (see annotated figure above) and the first engine mount flange (see annotated figure above). Ostdiek does not disclose wherein three linkage flanges extend radially outwardly from the first engine mount flange, and wherein three T-shaped flanges extend radially outwardly from the second engine mount flange.
Levert teaches (see fig. 1) an aircraft engine (see title) and further teaches two linkage flanges 20a,20b extend radially outwardly from a first engine mount flange 34, and wherein two T-shaped (see annotated figure above) flanges 22 extend radially outwardly from a second engine mount flange 36.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Ostdiek in view of Nilsson and Chouard with wherein two linkage flanges extend radially outwardly from the first engine mount flange, and wherein two T-shaped flanges extend radially outwardly from the second engine mount flange as taught by Levert in order to facilitate improved structural reliability (see Levert par. 14).
It is further noted that Sandy teaches the general concept that there can be two flanges (see annotated figures above) extending radially outward from an engine (see gas turbine engine at 12 in fig. 1) mount flange 26,28,30 or three flanges (see annotated figures above) extending radially outward from an engine mount flange 28,30. It has been held in re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), “the duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced” (see MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to duplicate a linkage flange of Ostdiek in view of Nilsson, Chouard and Levert and to duplicate a T-shaped linkage flange of Ostdiek in view of Nilsson, Chouard and Levert because there is no information on record regarding a new and unexpected result being produced by use of Applicant’s third linkage flange and third T-shaped flange.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that nowhere does the cited art, taken alone or in combination, disclose or suggest each and every feature recited in amended independent claim 1 of the present application. It is further noted that claim 1 of the amendment filed 06/18/2025 comprises limitations from claims 4, 11 and 12 of the October 2024 claim set. Thus these limitations were met with the prior art as explained in the 103 section on pages 7 and 9-12 of the office action mailed 04/04/2025. The newly amended claim 13 limitations are similar to the amended claim 1 limitations. There is no additional argument explaining why such prior art rejections in the instant 103 section are improper and thus the corresponding prior art is maintained in this office action regarding claims 1 and 13.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC J AMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-9948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/MARC AMAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/LORNE E MEADE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741