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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 9, 12-13, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Gatzen, Caren, et al. "YAlO3—a novel environmental barrier coating for Al2O3/Al2O3–ceramic matrix composites." Coatings 9.10 (2019): 609.
in view of TriplexPro-210 gun data sheet (see attached document).
Claim 1. Gatzen discloses a method for producing a coating (environmental barrier coating, title) in which
- a substrate is provided (coating deposited on a substrate, abstract, Fig. 4),
- the substrate is provided with the coating (coating deposited on a substrate, abstract, Fig. 4) by plasma spraying,
wherein a plasma torch (TriplexPro-210 gun, page 3) with a torch nozzle (TriplexPro-210 gun has a nozzle, page 3, Data Sheet) is used, with which a plasma jet (plasma coating, page 3) is generated from a supplied process gas (Argon gas, Table 1), and wherein a supplied spraying material (YAlO3 powder, page 4) is applied to the substrate with the plasma jet in order to obtain the coating (plasma coating, page 3),
wherein the torch nozzle is characterized by a nozzle diameter or a
wherein process gas flow is at least 100 slpm (total gas supplied 130 slpm, table 1),
wherein a spray material with a mean particle diameter of at most 40 micrometers is used (YAlO3 powder with a particle size of 37 um, page 4), and
wherein the spray material comprises or is given by at least one rare earth silicate and/or YAlO3 (YAlO3 powder, page 4) and/or LaMgAl11O9,
wherein the substrate is heated, at least in sections, to a temperature of at least 300C during the application of the coating (substrate is preheated, page 5, preheated temperature of 1025 C, table 1), and
wherein a coating is produced which is at least 50% crystalline (YAlO3 had a Rietveld refinement of greater than 88 %, page 7).
Gatzen does not explicitly disclose the nozzle size used in their experiments.
However, the data sheet for the TriplexPro-210 gun states that nozzle sizes between 5 mm-9 mm are standard sizes supplied with the gun (page 3, section 1.3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen to incorporate the teachings of the data sheet and use a nozzle between 5 mm and 8 mm because those diameters are standard sizes that come with the plasma gun.
Claim 3. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the coating produced is single-layer or multilayer coating is produced (multiple layers, page 6), and/or
wherein a silicon or silicate or aluminate layer, hafnate layer or perovskite layer or mixtures thereof is produced as the coating or as part of the coating.
Claim 4. Gatzen in view of TriplexPro data sheet discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the spray material is used which comprises or is given by at least one rare earth silicate, and/or that a spray material is used which comprises or is given by at least one rare earth aluminate (YAlO3, abstract).
Claim 9. Gatzen in view of TriplexPro data sheet does not disclose method according to claim 1, wherein the current is in the range from 400 A to 500 A.
However, Gatzen discloses a current of 520 A (table 1). It was determined that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
Claim 12. Gatzen in view of TriplexPro data sheet discloses method according to claim 1, wherein the substrate is preheated at least in sections to a temperature of at least 200°C before the application of the coating (preheating 1025 C, table 1).
Claim 13. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet discloses method according to claim 1, wherein the substrate comprises silicon, and/or
wherein the substrate comprises nickel, and/or
the substrate comprises alumina-based composites (alumina based CMC, abstract).
Claim 17. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet discloses the component comprising a substrate and a coating obtained by carrying out the method according to claim 1 (see Fig. 4).
Claim 18. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet discloses method according to claim 2, wherein the coating produced is a single-layer or multilayer coating (multiple layers, page 6), and/or
wherein a silicon or silicate or aluminate layer, hafnate layer or perovskite layer or mixtures thereof is produced as the coating or as part of the coating.
Claim 19. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet discloses method according to claim 2, wherein the spray material is used which comprises or is given by at least one rare earth silicate, and/or that the spray material is used which comprises or is given by at least one rare earth aluminate (YAlO3, abstract).
Claim 20. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet discloses method according to claim 3, wherein a spray material is used which comprises or is given by at least one rare earth silicate, and/or that a spray material is used which comprises or is given by at least one rare earth aluminate (YAlO3, abstract).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Steinwandel (US 20150017044 A1).
Claim 5. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet does not disclose method according to claim 1, wherein a spray material is used which comprises or is given by at least one rare earth hexaaluminate.
Steinwandel discloses plasma spraying hexaaluminate coat (par. 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet to incorporate the teachings of Steinwandel and depositing a hexaaluminate coating. Steinwandel demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to deposit a hexaaluminate coating based on desired specification and design (par. 19, Steinwandel).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dickinson (US 2010/0272982 A1)
Claim 6. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet does not disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the spray material with a mean particle diameter of at most 30 micrometers.
Gatzen discloses a powder with a particle size of 37 um.
Dickinson discloses low pressure plasma spray coating internal components for harsh environments (par. 2) wherein the spray powder particle size can be between 5-50 microns (par. 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet to incorporate the teachings of Dickinson and select a powder size of less than 30 microns. Dickinson demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art trying to solve a similar problem can select powder sizes less than 30 microns.
Claim 7. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet does not disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the spray material with a mean particle diameter in the range from 15 micrometers to 29 micrometers.
Gatzen discloses a powder with a particle size of 37 um.
Dickinson discloses plasma spray coating internal components for harsh environments (par. 2) wherein the spray powder particle size can be between 5-50 microns (par. 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet to incorporate the teachings of Dickinson and select a powder size of less than 30 microns. Dickinson demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art trying to solve a similar problem can select powder sizes less than 30 microns.
Claim(s) 2, 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gatzen in view of TriplexPro as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (US 2019/0157047 A1)
Claim 2. Gatzen in view of TriplexPro data sheet does not disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the process gas flow is at least 150 slpm (130 slpm, table 1).
Chen discloses a method of low pressure plasma spraying (par. 46) wherein the spraying parameters include a high speed process gas flow of 30 - 1000 L/min (table 1) and a powder feed rate of 10-200 g/min (table 1), and a distance of the bead blaster from the substrate of 50 -300 mm (table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of TriplexPro to incorporate the teachings of Gatzen and Chen and try a process gas flow of at least 150 slpm as part of routine optimization. MPEP 2144.05.II.A.
Claim 8. Gatzen in view of TriplexPro data sheet does not disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the spray distance between the torch nozzle and the substrate is in the range from 100 mm to 120 mm.
However, Gatzen further discloses using distance of 120 mm for atmospheric pressure spraying (table 2).
Chen discloses a method of low pressure plasma spraying (par. 46) wherein the spraying parameters include a high speed process gas flow of 30 - 1000 L/min (table 1) and a powder feed rate of 10-200 g/min (table 1), and a distance of the bead blaster from the substrate of 50 -300 mm (table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of TriplexPro to incorporate the teachings of Gatzen and Chen and try using a distance of 120 mm as part of routine optimization. MPEP 2144.05.II.A.
Claim 11. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet does not disclose method according to claim 1, wherein a feed rate of the spray material is at least 5 g/min.
Chen discloses a method of low pressure plasma spraying (par. 46) wherein the spraying parameters include a high speed process gas flow of 30 - 1000 L/min (table 1) and a powder feed rate of 10-200 g/min (table 1), and a distance of the bead blaster from the substrate of 50 -300 mm (table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet to incorporate the teachings of Chen and have a powder injector rate of at least 10 g/min. Chen demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to select a powder injector rate through ordinary routine optimization (MPEP 2144.05.II.A).
Claim(s) 10 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gatzen in view of TriplexPro as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sun (US 2015/0321964 A1)
Claim 10. Gatzen in view of TriplexPro data sheet does not disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein a burner speed is at most 2000 mm/s
Sun discloses a method of plasma spraying wherein the spraying parameters include a high speed process gas flow of 400 L/min (par. 37) and a nozzle size of 6 mm (claim 8) wherein the torch has a raster speed of 700 mm/s (table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet to incorporate the teachings of Sun and select a raster speed less than 2000 mm/s. Sun demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to select a raster speed less than 2000 mm/s through ordinary routine optimization (MPEP 2144.05.II.A).
Claim 15. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet discloses method according claim 1, wherein the process gas flow is in the range from 100 slpm to 500 slpm (130 slpm, table),
wherein the torch nozzle is characterized by a nozzle diameter or a minimum nozzle diameter in the range from 5 mm to 7 mm (nozzle diameter of 5 mm to 9 mm, data sheet, page 2),
wherein a spray material with a mean particle diameter in the range from 5 micrometers to 40 micrometers (the spray powder particle size is 37 um, page 4), and
Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet does not disclose
Sun discloses a method of plasma spraying wherein the spraying parameters wherein the substrate is preheated to a temperature of 300 C (par. 53, Sun).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro data sheet to incorporate the teachings of Gatzen and Sun and select a preheating temperature between 300-700 C. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to select that temperature range through ordinary routine optimization (MPEP 2144.05.II.A).
Claim 16. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro and Sun data sheet discloses method according to claim 15, wherein the spray distance between the torch nozzle and the substrate is at least 100 mm (700 mm, table 1), and
that the current is at least 400 A (2150 A, table 1).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schaer (US 11839951 B2).
Claim 14. Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet does not disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the coating is produced in a single pass.
Schaer discloses an atmospheric plasma spray process wherein the coating can be applied with a single spray pass (claim 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gatzen in view of the TriplexPro Data Sheet to incorporate the teachings of Schaer and produce a coating in a single pass. Schaer demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of depositing a coating through a single spray pass (claim 7, Schaer).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6422. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.
/SIMPSON A CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights