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 claim(s) 1-3 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McCabe (US 3,204,548).
With respect to claim 1 McCabe discloses an airfoil blade assembly, comprising: an upper airfoil shell [reference character 46]; a lower airfoil shell [reference character 47]; a seam [see annotated Fig. below] formed in only one of said upper airfoil shell and said lower airfoil shell: an elastic bead [reference character 48] positioned within said lateral seam; and wherein said elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said lateral seam when said upper airfoil shell is fixed to said lower airfoil shell.
PNG
media_image1.png
411
795
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Edwards (US 5,732,507).
With respect to claim 1 Edwards discloses an airfoil blade assembly, comprising: an upper airfoil shell [reference character 11]; a lower airfoil shell [reference character 12]; a seam [see annotated Fig. below] formed in only one of said upper airfoil shell and said lower airfoil shell: an elastic bead [reference character 19] positioned within said lateral seam; and wherein said elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said lateral seam when said upper airfoil shell is fixed to said lower airfoil shell.
PNG
media_image2.png
305
734
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McCabe (US 3,204,548).
With respect to claim 2 McCabe discloses a first blade assembly and a second blade assembly arranged for selective movement relative to one another [see Figs. 3-5, each showing three blade assemblies labeled 26], said first blade assembly including a first upper airfoil shell [reference character 46] and a first lower airfoil shell [reference character 47], wherein only one of said first upper airfoil shell and said first lower airfoil shell defines a first lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1], and said second blade assembly including a second upper airfoil shell [also reference character 46] and a second lower airfoil shell [also reference character 47], wherein only one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell defines a second lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1]; a first elastic bead [reference character 48] captured within said first lateral seam and a second elastic bead [also reference character 48] captured within said second lateral seam, wherein said first elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said first lateral seam and said second elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said second lateral seam [see Figs. 3-5]; and wherein said one of said first elastic bead and said second elastic bead becomes trapped between a first planar face of one of said first upper airfoil shell and said first lower airfoil shell, and a second planar face of one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell, when said first blade assembly and said second blade assembly are moved to contact one another.
PNG
media_image3.png
418
711
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Edwards (US 5,732,507).
With respect to claim 2 Edwards discloses a first blade assembly and a second blade assembly arranged for selective movement relative to one another [see Figs. 1 and 2], said first blade assembly including a first upper airfoil shell [reference character 11] and a first lower airfoil shell [reference character 12], wherein only one of said first upper airfoil shell and said first lower airfoil shell defines a first lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1], and said second blade assembly including a second upper airfoil shell [also reference character 11] and a second lower airfoil shell [also reference character 12], wherein only one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell defines a second lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1]; a first elastic bead [reference character 19] captured within said first lateral seam and a second elastic bead [also reference character 19] captured within said second lateral seam, wherein said first elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said first lateral seam and said second elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said second lateral seam [see Figs. 1 and 2]; and wherein said one of said first elastic bead and said second elastic bead becomes trapped between a first planar face of one of said first upper airfoil shell and said first lower airfoil shell [the planar face that includes the elastic bead 19], and a second planar face [reference character 22] of one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell, when said first blade assembly and said second blade assembly are moved to contact one another.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McCabe (US 3,204,548).
With respect to claim 3 McCabe discloses a method of sealing an airfoil blade damper apparatus, said method comprising the steps of: arranging a first blade assembly and a second blade assembly for selective movement relative to one another [see Figs. 3-5, each showing three blade assemblies labeled 26]; forming said first blade assembly to include a first upper airfoil shell [reference character 46] and a first lower airfoil shell [reference character 47], wherein only one of said first upper airfoil shell and said first lower airfoil shell defines a first lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1]; forming said second blade assembly to include a second upper airfoil shell [also reference character 46] and a second lower airfoil shell [also reference character 47], wherein only one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell defines a second lateral seam; positioning a first elastic bead [reference character 48] within said first lateral seam and a second elastic bead [also reference character 48] within said second lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1], wherein said first elastic bead protrudes out of said first lateral seam and said second elastic bead protrudes out of said second lateral seam; and wherein said first elastic bead becomes trapped against a planar face of one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 2], when said first blade assembly and said second blade assembly are moved to contact one another.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Edwards (US 5,732,507).
With respect to claim 3 Edwards discloses a method of sealing an airfoil blade damper apparatus, said method comprising the steps of: arranging a first blade assembly and a second blade assembly for selective movement relative to one another [see Figs. 1 and 2]; forming said first blade assembly to include a first upper airfoil shell [reference character 11] and a first lower airfoil shell [reference character 12], wherein only one of said first upper airfoil shell and said first lower airfoil shell defines a first lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1]; forming said second blade assembly to include a second upper airfoil shell [also reference character 11] and a second lower airfoil shell [also reference character 12], wherein only one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell defines a second lateral seam; positioning a first elastic bead [reference character 19] within said first lateral seam and a second elastic bead [reference character 19] within said second lateral seam [see annotated Fig. above in connection with claim 1], wherein said first elastic bead protrudes out of said first lateral seam and said second elastic bead protrudes out of said second lateral seam; and wherein said first elastic bead becomes trapped against a planar face of one of said second upper airfoil shell and said second lower airfoil shell [the planar face that includes the elastic bead 19 or reference character 22], when said first blade assembly and said second blade assembly are moved to contact one another.
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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bacelaere (US 4,610,197) in view of McCabe (US 3,908,529).
With respect to claim 4 Bacelaere discloses an airfoil blade assembly, comprising: a first airfoil shell [reference character 14]; a second airfoil shell [reference character 12], wherein an end portion of said second airfoil shell is bent to capture therein a distal portion of said first airfoil shell [see Fig. 3].
Bacelaere does not disclose that said end portion being bent back towards said second airfoil shell and forming thereby a lateral seam; an elastic bead positioned within said lateral seam; and wherein said elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said lateral seam when said first airfoil shell is fixed to said second airfoil shell.
McCabe discloses a backdraft damper that includes a portion that is bent back away from the end portion of the damper [see annotated Fig. below] and bent back toward the end portion of the damper [see annotated Fig. below] forming a lateral seam [see annotated Fig. below], and elastic bead [reference character 22] positioned within the lateral seam where the elastic bead extends beyond a periphery of said lateral seam.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the blade assembly taught by Bacelaere by bending the end portion of the second airfoil shell back toward the second airfoil shell and position an elastic bead within the lateral seam, as taught by McCabe, in order to facilitate a seal between the damper vanes in the closed position.
PNG
media_image4.png
512
564
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIVEK K SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)272-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:20AM.
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 B McAllister can be reached on 571-272-6785. 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.
/VIVEK K SHIRSAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762