DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the Request for Continued Examination filed 2/17/2026 wherein claims 2-3, 5, 13, and 16-22 are canceled, claims 6-8 and 14-15 are withdrawn, and claims 1, 4, 9-12, and 23-28 are presented for examination.
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 .
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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/17/2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “air purge passage radially outboard of the guide foot” in combination with “the air purge passage located radially within the guide foot” (Claim 1, lines 9-10 and 14-15) and the “air purge passage radially outboard of the guide foot” in combination with “the air purge passage located radially within the guide foot” (Claim 25, lines 13 and 18) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 4, 9-12, 14, 23, and 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the air purge passage radially outboard of the guide foot" and “the air purge passage located radially within the guide foot” in lines 9-10 and 14-15. It is unclear if the air purge passage is located within the guide foot or if it is located radially outboard of the guide foot.
Claims 4, 9-12, 14, and 23 are rejected for the same reasons discussed above based on their dependency to claim 1.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the air purge passage radially outboard of the guide foot" and “the air purge passage located radially within the guide foot” in lines 13 and 18. It is unclear if the air purge passage is located within the guide foot or if it is located radially outboard of the guide foot.
Claims 26-28 are rejected for the same reasons discussed above based on their dependency to claim 25.
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.
Claims 1, 9-10, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naik et al. (US 2023/0194092) in view of Al-Roub et al. (US 2004/0065090), Locke et al. (US 2021/0172604), and either Sturgess et al. (US 3,703,259) or Weinstein et al. (US 3,946,552).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Naik teaches (Figures 1-10) an assembly (130; see Figure 3) for a gas turbine engine (10), comprising:
an air swirler structure (134) including a swirler guide wall (the inner wall of 142, facing 132), an inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) and an air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3), the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) extending axially along an axis (128) through the air swirler structure (134), and the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) extending radially (with respect to axis 128; see Figures 3-8) into the air swirler structure (134) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3);
an injector nozzle (132) projecting axially (along axis 128) into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3); and
a nozzle guide (annotated below) coupling the injector nozzle (132) to the air swirler structure (134), the nozzle guide (annotated below) including a guide foot (annotated below) and an air purge passage (154) radially outboard of the guide foot (annotated below), the guide foot (annotated below) configured to radially engage (see Figure 3) the injector nozzle (132), the air purge passage (154) extending across the nozzle guide (annotated below) and axially to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), the guide foot (annotated below) extending radially between a guide inner side (the side facing toward 132) and a guide outer side (the side facing away from 132, near 140), the air purge passage (154) located radially within (see Figures 3-5 and 8) the guide foot (annotated below) between the guide inner side (the side facing toward 132) and the guide outer side (the side facing away from 132, near 140), the air purge passage (154) configured to purge air from an interior corner (see Figures 3-4 and 6) between the nozzle guide (annotated below) and the injector nozzle (134), and an outlet (at 152) from the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) is arranged axially (see Figures 3-4 and 6) between a tip portion (156) of the injector nozzle (134) and an outlet (see Figures 3-4) from the air purge passage (154).
Naik’s Figure 3 embodiment teaches that the air purge passage (154) will include at least an axial component (see Figure 3) as the air purge passage (154) extends axially through the nozzle guide (134) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3).
Naik also teaches, in Figures 5-6, that the air purge passage (252) can extend axially through (see Figures 5-6) the nozzle guide (134, 234) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), in a direction that is parallel to the central longitudinal axis of the fuel nozzle (232).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik’s Figure 3 embodiment to have the air purge passage extends axially through the nozzle guide to the inner bore such that the air purge passage extends in a direction that is parallel to the central longitudinal axis of the fuel nozzle, as taught by Naik’s Figures 5-6, in order to reduce or eliminate flashback or flame holding (see Paragraphs 0046 and 0049 of Naik).
Naik does not teach that the nozzle guide includes a plurality of purge passage vanes, the plurality of purge vanes arranged circumferentially about the axis, each of the plurality of purge passage vanes extending radially across the air purge passage or that the swirler guide wall that extends axially along the axis to a downstream end, and the swirler guide wall tapering radially inward towards the axis, a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage, or the air swirler structure includes a receptacle, wherein the nozzle guide projects radially within the receptacle, and the guide foot is configured to radially engage and move axially along the injector nozzle.
Al-Roub teaches (Figures 1-3) a nozzle guide (52) coupling the injector nozzle (32) to the air swirler structure (40, 50), the nozzle guide (52) including a guide foot (annotated below) and an air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) radially outboard of the guide foot (annotated below), the guide foot (annotated below) configured to radially engage (see Figure 2) the injector nozzle (32), and the air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) extending across the nozzle guide (52) and axially (the passage between vanes 54 includes at least an axial component; see Figure 2) to the inner bore (the central opening formed by 40; see Figure 2), wherein the nozzle guide (52) further includes a plurality of purge passage vanes (54); and the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) are arranged circumferentially about the axis (38; see Figures 2-3), and each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) extends radially across (the vanes include at least one dimension that extends in a radial direction; see Figures 2-3) the air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3), wherein the air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) is configured to purge air from an interior corner (due to the orientation of outlet 58; see Figures 1-3) between the nozzle guide (52) and the injector nozzle (32). Al-Roub also teaches (see Figure 2) that the air swirler structure (40, 50) includes a receptacle (annotated below), wherein the nozzle guide (52) projects radially within the receptacle (annotated below).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik to have the nozzle guide include a plurality of purge passage vanes, the plurality of purge vanes arranged circumferentially about the axis, each of the plurality of purge passage vanes extending radially across the air purge passage, as taught by Al-Roub, in order to produce angular momentum in the primary airflow to stabilize flow from the swirler, and eliminate flow separation (Paragraph 0032 of Al-Roub). Naik in view of Al-Roub does not teach that the swirler guide wall that extends axially along the axis to a downstream end, the swirler guide wall tapering radially inward towards the axis or that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage, or that the guide foot is configured to radially engage and move axially along the injector nozzle.
Locke teaches (Figures 1-9) a swirler guide wall (120 or 140) that extends axially along an air swirler axis (70) to a downstream end (at 118 or 138), and the swirler guide wall (120 or 140) tapering radially inward towards the axis (70; see Figures 3, 7, and 9). Locke also teaches (Figures 1-9) that the air swirler structure (64) includes a receptacle (formed by 162; see Figure 7), wherein the nozzle guide (164) projects radially within the receptacle (formed by 162; see Figure 7), and the guide foot (164) is configured to radially engage and move axially along the injector nozzle (due to the radial and axial spacing of the nozzle guide 164 shown in Figure 7 and its description of being able to “float” in Paragraph 0065).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub to have the swirler guide wall extend axially along the axis to a downstream end, and the swirler guide wall tapering radially inward towards the axis, and to have the air swirler structure includes a receptacle, wherein the nozzle guide projects radially within the receptacle, and the guide foot is configured to radially engage and move axially along the injector nozzle, as taught by Locke, in order to have a tubular conical geometry (Paragraph 0051 of Locke) to cause fuel to form a thin film of fuel that travels along the inner wall surface towards the nozzle outlet to atomize the fuel for combustion within the combustion chamber (Paragraph 0066 of Locke), and to loosely couple and locate the fuel injector nozzle to the swirler while enabling for slight shifts due to differential thermal expansion as well as vibrations (Paragraph 0065 of Locke). It is further noted that a simple substitution of one known element (in this case, the flared swirler guide wall of Naik and Al-Roub) for another (in this case, the conical swirler guide wall of Locke) to obtain predictable results (in this case, to guide a flow of air to the combustion zone) was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. at 415-421, 82 USPQ2d at 1396, MPEP 2141 III B. Naik and Al-Roub and Lock does not teach that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage.
Sturgess teaches (Figures 1-13) a nozzle guide (42) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (44), the plurality of purge passage vanes (44) are arranged circumferentially about an axis (see Figures 1-2), each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (44) extending radially across (see Figures 1-2) a purge passage (39), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 44; see Figures 1-2) of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes (44) is spaced an axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 39) from the air purge passage (39).
Weinstein also teaches (Figures 1-2) a nozzle guide (36) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (54), the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) are arranged circumferentially about an axis (see Figures 1-2), each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) extending radially across (see Figures 1-2) a purge passage (40), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 54; see Figures 1-2) of a first (one of 54) of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) is spaced a first axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 40; see Figures 1-2) from the air purge passage (40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub and Locke to include the vanes having a trailing edge that is spaced an axial distance from an outlet from the air purge passage, as taught by Sturgess and Weinstein, in order to impart a circumferential velocity component to the received compressor discharge air (Column 5, lines 6-12 of Sturgess) and to provide a swirl means at the inlet to the annular air passage (Column 3, lines 43-47 of Weinstein). It is further noted it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention (in this case, the relative location of the vanes with respect to the passage outlet) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
PNG
media_image1.png
1317
1458
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
714
889
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik further teaches (Figures 1-10) wherein the air swirler structure (134) further includes a radial air swirler (at 144) comprising an air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3), and the radial air swirler (at 144) is configured to direct a first quantity of air through the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) and radially into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3); and the nozzle guide (annotated above) further includes an axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6) comprising an air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048), and the axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6) is configured to direct a second quantity of air through the air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) and axially into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) along a tip portion (156) of the injector nozzle (132).
Regarding Claim 10, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein the radial air swirler is configured to swirl the first quantity of air directed through the air swirler passage in a first direction about the axis; and the axial air swirler is configured to swirl the second quantity of air directed through the air purge passage in a second direction about the axis that is opposite the first direction.
Sturgess teaches (Figures 1-13) a radial air swirler (at 46) that is configured to swirl a first quantity of air through an air swirler passage (between vanes 46; see Figure 2) in a first direction (72; see Figure 2) about an axis (a central axis through 34; see Figure 2) and an axial air swirler (at 44) that is configured to swirl a second quantity of air (between vanes 44; see Figure 2) directed in a second direction (70; see Figure 2) about the axis (a central axis through 34; see Figure 2), wherein the second direction (a clockwise direction) is opposite the first direction (a counter-clockwise direction; see Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein to have the radial air swirler configured to direct a first quantity of air through the air swirler passage in a first direction about an axis and the axial air swirler configured to direct a second quantity of air is directed in a second direction about the axis, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction, as taught by Sturgess, in order to deliver highly atomized fuel by the high aerodynamic shear stresses developed at the confluence of the counter-rotating primary and secondary streams of air (Column 5, lines 41-50 of Sturgess).
It is noted that Weinstein also teaches counter-rotating air swirl means (see abstract of Weinstein).
Regarding Claim 23, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein the nozzle guide further includes a guide base; the guide base extends radially between the guide inner side and a nozzle guide outer side and axially between opposing axial sides; and the guide foot extends axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides to a device upstream side.
Locke teaches (Figures 1-9) a nozzle guide (164) including a guide base (annotated below); the guide base (annotated below) extends radially between the guide inner side (at the inner shroud annotated below) and a nozzle guide outer side (the guide outer side annotated below) and axially between opposing axial sides (the downstream axial side and the upstream axial side annotated below); and the guide foot (annotated below) extends axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides (see annotation below) to a device upstream side (annotated below).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein to have the nozzle guide include a guide base; the guide base extends radially between the guide inner side and a nozzle guide outer side and axially between opposing axial sides; and the guide foot extends axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides to a device upstream side, as taught by Locke, in order to allow to nozzle guide plate to float, to a limited degree, relative to the swirler so that the mount can loosely couple and locate the fuel injector nozzle to the swirler while enabling for slight shifts due to differential and thermal expansion as well as vibrations (see Paragraph 0065 of Locke).
PNG
media_image3.png
768
895
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naik et al. (US 2023/0194092) in view of Al-Roub et al. (US 2004/0065090), Locke et al. (US 2021/0172604), and Weinstein et al. (US 3,946,552).
Regarding Claim 4, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Weinstein does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein a leading edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced an axial distance from an inlet to the air purge passage.
Weinstein teaches (Figures 1-2) a nozzle guide (36) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (54), the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) are arranged circumferentially about an axis (see Figures 1-2), each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) extending radially across (see Figures 1-2) a purge passage (40), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 54; see Figures 1-2) of a first (one of 54) of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) is spaced a first axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 40; see Figures 1-2) from the air purge passage (40), wherein a leading edge (the axially upstream end of 54; see Figures 1-2) of the first (one of 54) of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) is spaced a second axial distance (see Figures 1-2) from an inlet (the upstream end of 40; see Figures 1-2) to the air purge passage (40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Weinstein to have a leading edge of the first of the plurality of purge passage vanes be spaced an axial distance from an inlet to the air purge passage, as taught by Weinstein, for the same reasons discussed above in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Weinstein does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein the radial air swirler is configured to swirl the first quantity of air directed through the air swirler passage in a first direction about the axis; and the axial air swirler is configured to swirl the second quantity of air directed through the air purge passage in the first direction about the axis.
Weinstein teaches (Figures 1-2) wherein the radial air swirler (60) is configured to swirl the first quantity of air (through 58; see Figures 1-2) directed through the air swirler passage (66) in a first direction (vortical airflows emanating from vanes 54 and vanes 60 are in a same clockwise circumferential direction; see Column 4, lines 50-68) about the axis (a longitudinal axis through passage 57; see Figures 1-2); and the axial air swirler (54) is configured to swirl the second quantity of air (through 51) directed through the air purge passage (40) in the first direction (vortical airflows emanating from vanes 54 and vanes 60 are in a same clockwise circumferential direction; see Column 4, lines 50-68) about the axis (a longitudinal axis through passage 57; see Figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Weinstein to have the radial air swirler configured to swirl the first quantity of air directed through the air swirler passage in a first direction about the axis, and the axial air swirler configured to swirl the second quantity of air directed through the air purge passage in the first direction about the axis, as taught by Weinstein, in order to shear and accelerate the fuel within the core air passage by the coaction of the vortical airflows emanating from the primary swirl and secondary swirl means (Column 4, lines 50-68 of Weinstein).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naik et al. (US 2023/0194092) in view of Al-Roub et al. (US 2004/0065090), Locke et al. (US 2021/0172604), and either Sturgess et al. (US 3,703,259) or Weinstein et al. (US 3,946,552) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Bahr et al. (US 3,853,273).
Regarding Claim 12, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein does not teach wherein the first quantity of air is greater than the second quantity of air.
Bahr teaches (Figures 1-3) wherein a first quantity of air (see flow arrows in Figure 1) passing through radial swirl vanes (86) is greater than (see Figure 1 and Column 6, lines 50-65) a second quantity of air (see flow arrows of Figure 1) passing through axial swirl vanes (70).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess or Weinstein to have the first quantity of air is greater than the second quantity of air, as taught by Bahr, in order to allow the portion of air entering through the radial counterswirl vanes to highly atomize the fuel due to the high aerodynamic shear stresses developed at the confluence of the counterrotating vortical air flows (Column 6, lines 37-48 of Bahr).
It is noted that, in cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Claims 24-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naik et al. (US 2023/0194092) in view of Al-Roub et al. (US 2004/0065090), Locke et al. (US 2021/0172604), Sturgess et al. (US 3,703,259), and Weinstein et al. (US 3,946,552).
Regarding Independent Claim 24, Naik teaches (Figures 1-10) an assembly (130; see Figure 3) for a gas turbine engine (10), comprising:
an air swirler structure (134) including an inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) and radial air swirler (at 144) comprising an air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3), the radial air swirler (at 144) is configured to direct a first quantity of air through the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) in a first direction (a tangential direction; see Paragraph 0037 and Figure 4) about an axis (128) and radially into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) extending axially along the axis (128) through the air swirler structure (134), and the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) extending radially into the air swirler structure (134) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3);
an injector nozzle (132) projecting axially (along axis 128) into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3); and
a nozzle guide (annotated below) coupling the injector nozzle (132) to the air swirler structure (134), the nozzle guide (annotated below) including a guide foot (annotated below), a guide base (annotated below), and an axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6), the axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6) comprising an air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048), the guide foot (annotated below) configured to radially engage the injector nozzle (132; see Figures 3-6), the guide foot (annotated below) extending radially between an inner guide foot side (annotated below) and an outer guide foot side (annotated below), the air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) extending across the nozzle guide (annotated below) and axially into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), the air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) located within the guide foot (annotated below) between the inner guide foot side (annotated below) and the outer guide foot side (annotated below), the guide base (annotated below) extending radially between the inner guide foot side (annotated below) and a nozzle guide outer side (annotated below), the air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) configured to purge air from an interior corner (see Figures 3-6) between the nozzle guide (annotated above) and the injector nozzle (132), the axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6) is configured to direct a second quantity of air through the air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) axially into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) along a tip portion (156) of the injector nozzle (132), and an outlet (at 152) from the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) is arranged axially between the tip portion (156) of the injector nozzle (132) and an outlet from the air purge passage (at the downstream end of 154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6).
Naik does not teach that the nozzle guide includes a plurality of passage vanes, the guide base extending axially between opposing axial sides, the guide foot extending axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides to a device upstream side, the second quantity of air is directed in a second direction about the axis, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction or that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage and wherein a leading edge of the first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a second axial distance from an inlet to the air purge passage.
Al-Roub teaches (Figures 1-3) a nozzle guide (52) coupling the injector nozzle (32) to the air swirler structure (40, 50), the nozzle guide (52) including an air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) extending across the nozzle guide (52) and axially (the passage between vanes 54 includes at least an axial component; see Figure 2) to the inner bore (the central opening formed by 40; see Figure 2), wherein the nozzle guide (52) further includes a plurality of purge passage vanes (54).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik to have the nozzle guide include a plurality of purge passage vanes, as taught by Al-Roub, in order to produce angular momentum in the primary airflow to stabilize flow from the swirler, and eliminate flow separation (Paragraph 0032 of Al-Roub). Naik in view of Al-Roub does not teach the guide base extending axially between opposing axial sides, the guide foot extending axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides to a device upstream side, the second quantity of air is directed in a second direction about the axis, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction or that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage and wherein a leading edge of the first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a second axial distance from an inlet to the air purge passage.
Locke teaches (Figures 1-9) a nozzle guide (164) including a guide base (annotated above); the guide base (annotated above) extends axially between opposing axial sides (the downstream axial side and the upstream axial side annotated above); and the guide foot (annotated above) extends axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides (see annotation above) to a device upstream side (annotated above).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub to have the nozzle guide include a guide base; the guide base extends radially between the guide inner side and a nozzle guide outer side and axially between opposing axial sides; and the guide foot extends axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides to a device upstream side, as taught by Locke, in order to allow to nozzle guide plate to float, to a limited degree, relative to the swirler so that the mount can loosely couple and locate the fuel injector nozzle to the swirler while enabling for slight shifts due to differential and thermal expansion as well as vibrations (see Paragraph 0065 of Locke). Naik in view of Al-Roub and Locke does not teach the second quantity of air is directed in a second direction about the axis, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction or that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage and wherein a leading edge of the first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a second axial distance from an inlet to the air purge passage.
Sturgess teaches (Figures 1-13) a radial air swirler (at 46) configured to direct a first quantity of air through an air swirler passage (between vanes 46; see Figure 2) in a first direction (72; see Figure 2) about an axis (a central axis through 34; see Figure 2) and an axial air swirler (at 44) configured to direct a second quantity of air (between vanes 44; see Figure 2) is directed in a second direction (70; see Figure 2) about the axis (a central axis through 34; see Figure 2), wherein the second direction (a clockwise direction) is opposite the first direction (a counter-clockwise direction; see Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub and Locke to have the radial air swirler configured to direct a first quantity of air through the air swirler passage in a first direction about an axis and the axial air swirler configured to direct a second quantity of air is directed in a second direction about the axis, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction, as taught by Sturgess, in order to deliver highly atomized fuel by the high aerodynamic shear stresses developed at the confluence of the counter-rotating primary and secondary streams of air (Column 5, lines 41-50 of Sturgess). Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess does not teach, as discussed so far, that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage and a leading edge of the first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a second axial distance from an inlet to the air purge passage.
Weinstein teaches (Figures 1-2) a nozzle guide (36) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (54), the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) are arranged circumferentially about an axis (see Figures 1-2), each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) extending radially across (see Figures 1-2) a purge passage (40), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 54; see Figures 1-2) of a first (one of 54) of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) is spaced a first axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 40; see Figures 1-2) from the air purge passage (40), wherein a leading edge (the axially upstream end of 54; see Figures 1-2) of the first (one of 54) of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) is spaced a second axial distance (see Figures 1-2) from an inlet (the upstream end of 40; see Figures 1-2) to the air purge passage (40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, and Sturgess to include the trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes be spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage and a leading edge of the first of the plurality of purge passage vanes be spaced a second axial distance from an inlet to the air purge passage, as taught by Weinstein, in order to provide a swirl means at the inlet to the annular air passage (Column 3, lines 43-47 of Weinstein). It is further noted it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention (in this case, the relative location of the vanes with respect to the passage inlet and outlet) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
PNG
media_image4.png
577
792
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Independent Claim 25, Naik teaches (Figures 1-10) an assembly (130; see Figure 3) for a gas turbine engine (10), comprising:
an air swirler structure (134) including a swirler guide wall (the inner wall of 142, facing 132), an inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), a radial air swirler (at 144), the radial air swirler (at 144) including an air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3), the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) extending axially along an axis (128) through the air swirler structure (134), and the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) extending radially (with respect to axis 128; see Figures 3-8) into the air swirler structure (134) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), the radial air swirler (at 144) is configured to direct a first quantity of air through the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) in a first direction (a tangential direction; see Paragraph 0037 and Figure 4) about an axis (128) and radially into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), the swirler guide wall (the inner wall of 142) extending axially along the axis (surrounding 132) to a downstream end (the axially downstream end of 142; see Figures 3-4);
an injector nozzle (132) projecting axially (along axis 128) into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), the injector nozzle (312) including a tip portion (annotated above); and
a nozzle guide (annotated above) coupling the injector nozzle (132) to the air swirler structure (134), the nozzle guide (annotated above) including a guide foot (annotated above) and an axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6), the axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6) comprising an air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) and an air purge passage (154), the air purge passage (154) radially outboard of the guide foot (annotated above), the guide foot (annotated above) configured to radially engage (see Figure 3) the injector nozzle (132), the air purge passage (154) extending across the nozzle guide (annotated above) and axially to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), the guide foot (annotated above) extending radially between a guide inner side (the side facing toward 132) and a guide outer side (the side facing away from 132, near 140), the air purge passage (154) located radially within (see Figures 3-5 and 8) the guide foot (annotated above) between the guide inner side (the side facing toward 132) and the guide outer side (the side facing away from 132, near 140), the air purge passage (154) configured to purge air from an interior corner (see Figures 3-4 and 6) between the nozzle guide (annotated above) and the injector nozzle (134), the axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6) is configured to direct a second quantity of air through the air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) axially into the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3) along a tip portion (156) of the injector nozzle (132), and an outlet (at 152) from the air swirler passage (the passage between vanes 144 and between 146, 142; see Figure 3) is arranged axially between the tip portion (156) of the injector nozzle (132) and an outlet from the air purge passage (at the downstream end of 154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6).
Naik’s Figure 3 embodiment teaches that the air purge passage (154) will include at least an axial component (see Figure 3) as the air purge passage (154) extends axially through the guide foot (annotated above) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3).
Naik also teaches, in Figures 5-6, that the air purge passage (252) can extend axially through (see Figures 5-6) the guide foot (annotated above) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), in a direction that is parallel to the central longitudinal axis of the fuel nozzle (232).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik’s Figure 3 embodiment to have the air purge passage extends axially through the guide foot to the inner bore such that the air purge passage extends in a direction that is parallel to the central longitudinal axis of the fuel nozzle, as taught by Naik’s Figures 5-6, in order to reduce or eliminate flashback or flame holding (see Paragraphs 0046 and 0049 of Naik).
Naik does not teach that the nozzle guide includes a plurality of purge passage vanes, the plurality of purge vanes arranged circumferentially about the axis, each of the plurality of purge passage vanes extending radially across the air purge passage or that the swirler guide wall that extends axially along the axis to a downstream end, and the swirler guide wall tapering radially inward towards the axis, a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage, the air swirler structure includes a receptacle, wherein the nozzle guide projects radially within the receptacle, or the guide foot is configured to radially engage and translate axially along a cylindrical land surface of the injector nozzle.
Al-Roub teaches (Figures 1-3) a nozzle guide (52) coupling the injector nozzle (32) to the air swirler structure (40, 50), the nozzle guide (52) including a guide foot (annotated above) and an air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) radially outboard of the guide foot (annotated above), the guide foot (annotated above) configured to radially engage (see Figure 2) the injector nozzle (32), and the air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) extending across the nozzle guide (52) and axially (the passage between vanes 54 includes at least an axial component; see Figure 2) to the inner bore (the central opening formed by 40; see Figure 2), wherein the nozzle guide (52) further includes a plurality of purge passage vanes (54); and the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) are arranged circumferentially about the axis (38; see Figures 2-3), and each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) extends radially across (the vanes include at least one dimension that extends in a radial direction; see Figures 2-3) the air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3), wherein the air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) is configured to purge air from an interior corner (due to the orientation of outlet 58; see Figures 1-3) between the nozzle guide (52) and the injector nozzle (32). Al-Roub also teaches (see Figure 2) that the air swirler structure (40, 50) includes a receptacle (annotated above), wherein the nozzle guide (52) projects radially within the receptacle (annotated above).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik to have the nozzle guide include a plurality of purge passage vanes, the plurality of purge vanes arranged circumferentially about the axis, each of the plurality of purge passage vanes extending radially across the air purge passage, as taught by Al-Roub, in order to produce angular momentum in the primary airflow to stabilize flow from the swirler, and eliminate flow separation (Paragraph 0032 of Al-Roub). Naik in view of Al-Roub does not teach that the swirler guide wall that extends axially along the axis to a downstream end, the swirler guide wall tapering radially inward towards the axis or that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage, or that the guide foot is configured to radially engage and translate axially along a cylindrical land surface of the injector nozzle.
Locke teaches (Figures 1-9) a swirler guide wall (120 or 140) that extends axially along an air swirler axis (70) to a downstream end (at 118 or 138), and the swirler guide wall (120 or 140) tapering radially inward towards the axis (70; see Figures 3, 7, and 9). Locke also teaches (Figures 1-9) that the air swirler structure (64) includes a receptacle (formed by 162; see Figure 7), wherein the nozzle guide (164) projects radially within the receptacle (formed by 162; see Figure 7), and the guide foot (164) is configured to radially engage and translate axially along a cylindrical land surface of the injector nozzle (due to the radial and axial spacing of the nozzle guide 164 shown in Figure 7 and it being able to “float” and the bore is sized such that the fuel injector nozzle may slide axially along the axis relative to the nozzle guide plate so that the mount may loosely couple and locate the fuel injector nozzle to the swirler while enabling slight shifts due to differential thermal expansion as well as vibrations; see Paragraph 0065).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub to have the swirler guide wall extend axially along the axis to a downstream end, and the swirler guide wall tapering radially inward towards the axis, and to have the air swirler structure includes a receptacle, wherein the nozzle guide projects radially within the receptacle, and the guide foot is configured to radially engage and translate axially along a cylindrical land surface of the injector nozzle, as taught by Locke, in order to have a tubular conical geometry (Paragraph 0051 of Locke) to cause fuel to form a thin film of fuel that travels along the inner wall surface towards the nozzle outlet to atomize the fuel for combustion within the combustion chamber (Paragraph 0066 of Locke), and to loosely couple and locate the fuel injector nozzle to the swirler while enabling for slight shifts due to differential thermal expansion as well as vibrations (Paragraph 0065 of Locke). It is further noted that a simple substitution of one known element (in this case, the flared swirler guide wall of Naik and Al-Roub) for another (in this case, the conical swirler guide wall of Locke) to obtain predictable results (in this case, to guide a flow of air to the combustion zone) was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. at 415-421, 82 USPQ2d at 1396, MPEP 2141 III B. Naik and Al-Roub and Locke does not teach that a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes is spaced a first axial distance from the outlet from the air purge passage.
Sturgess teaches (Figures 1-13) a nozzle guide (42) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (44), the plurality of purge passage vanes (44) are arranged circumferentially about an axis (see Figures 1-2), each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (44) extending radially across (see Figures 1-2) a purge passage (39), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 44; see Figures 1-2) of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes (44) is spaced an axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 39) from the air purge passage (39).
Weinstein also teaches (Figures 1-2) a nozzle guide (36) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (54), the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) are arranged circumferentially about an axis (see Figures 1-2), each of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) extending radially across (see Figures 1-2) a purge passage (40), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 54; see Figures 1-2) of a first (one of 54) of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) is spaced a first axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 40; see Figures 1-2) from the air purge passage (40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub and Locke to include the vanes having a trailing edge that is spaced an axial distance from an outlet from the air purge passage, as taught by Sturgess and Weinstein, in order to impart a circumferential velocity component to the received compressor discharge air (Column 5, lines 6-12 of Sturgess) and to provide a swirl means at the inlet to the annular air passage (Column 3, lines 43-47 of Weinstein). It is further noted it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention (in this case, the relative location of the vanes with respect to the passage outlet) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding Claim 26, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein the radial air swirler is configured to swirl the first quantity of air directed through the air swirler passage in a first direction about the axis; and the axial air swirler is configured to swirl the second quantity of air directed through the air purge passage in a second direction about the axis that is opposite the first direction.
Sturgess teaches (Figures 1-13) a radial air swirler (at 46) that is configured to swirl a first quantity of air through an air swirler passage (between vanes 46; see Figure 2) in a first direction (72; see Figure 2) about an axis (a central axis through 34; see Figure 2) and an axial air swirler (at 44) that is configured to swirl a second quantity of air (between vanes 44; see Figure 2) directed in a second direction (70; see Figure 2) about the axis (a central axis through 34; see Figure 2), wherein the second direction (a clockwise direction) is opposite the first direction (a counter-clockwise direction; see Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein to have the radial air swirler configured to direct a first quantity of air through the air swirler passage in a first direction about an axis and the axial air swirler configured to direct a second quantity of air is directed in a second direction about the axis, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction, as taught by Sturgess, in order to deliver highly atomized fuel by the high aerodynamic shear stresses developed at the confluence of the counter-rotating primary and secondary streams of air (Column 5, lines 41-50 of Sturgess).
It is noted that Weinstein also teaches counter-rotating air swirl means (see abstract of Weinstein).
Regarding Claim 27, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein the radial air swirler is configured to swirl the first quantity of air directed through the air swirler passage in a first direction about the axis; and the axial air swirler is configured to swirl the second quantity of air directed through the air purge passage in the first direction about the axis.
Weinstein teaches (Figures 1-2) wherein the radial air swirler (60) is configured to swirl the first quantity of air (through 58; see Figures 1-2) directed through the air swirler passage (66) in a first direction (vortical airflows emanating from vanes 54 and vanes 60 are in a same clockwise circumferential direction; see Column 4, lines 50-68) about the axis (a longitudinal axis through passage 57; see Figures 1-2); and the axial air swirler (54) is configured to swirl the second quantity of air (through 51) directed through the air purge passage (40) in the first direction (vortical airflows emanating from vanes 54 and vanes 60 are in a same clockwise circumferential direction; see Column 4, lines 50-68) about the axis (a longitudinal axis through passage 57; see Figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein to have the radial air swirler configured to swirl the first quantity of air directed through the air swirler passage in a first direction about the axis, and the axial air swirler configured to swirl the second quantity of air directed through the air purge passage in the first direction about the axis, as taught by Weinstein, in order to shear and accelerate the fuel within the core air passage by the coaction of the vortical airflows emanating from the primary swirl and secondary swirl means (Column 4, lines 50-68 of Weinstein).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naik et al. (US 2023/0194092) in view of Al-Roub et al. (US 2004/0065090), Locke et al. (US 2021/0172604), Sturgess et al. (US 3,703,259), and Weinstein et al. (US 3,946,552) as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Bahr et al. (US 3,853,273).
Regarding Claim 12, Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein does not teach wherein the first quantity of air is greater than the second quantity of air.
Bahr teaches (Figures 1-3) wherein a first quantity of air (see flow arrows in Figure 1) passing through radial swirl vanes (86) is greater than (see Figure 1 and Column 6, lines 50-65) a second quantity of air (see flow arrows of Figure 1) passing through axial swirl vanes (70).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Naik in view of Al-Roub, Locke, Sturgess, and Weinstein to have the first quantity of air is greater than the second quantity of air, as taught by Bahr, in order to allow the portion of air entering through the radial counterswirl vanes to highly atomize the fuel due to the high aerodynamic shear stresses developed at the confluence of the counterrotating vortical air flows (Column 6, lines 37-48 of Bahr).
It is noted that, in cases like the present, where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited within the claims, applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. As such, the claimed dimensions appear to be an obvious matter of engineering design choice and thus, while being a difference, does not serve in any way to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the applied prior art. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Kuhle, 526 F2d. 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Al-Roub’s air purge passage is not “located radially within the guide foot between the guide inner side and the guide outer side”. In response and as discussed in the rejection above, Al-Roub teaches (Figures 1-3) a nozzle guide (52) coupling the injector nozzle (32) to the air swirler structure (40, 50), the nozzle guide (52) including a guide foot (annotated above) and an air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) radially outboard of the guide foot (annotated above). It is further noted that Naik teaches (Figures 1-10) a nozzle guide (annotated above) coupling the injector nozzle (132) to the air swirler structure (134), the nozzle guide (annotated above) including a guide foot (annotated above) and an air purge passage (154) radially outboard of the guide foot (annotated above). In addition and as discussed above, it is not clear from Applicant’s claims where the air purge passage is to be located since the claims require both the air purge passage to simultaneously be present in two distinct and contradictory locations “radially within the guide foot” and “radially outboard the guide foot”.
Applicant also argues that the prior art does not teach a guide base, a plurality of purge passage vanes, the guide foot extending radially between an inner guide foot side and an outer guide foot side, the air purge passage located within the guide foot between the inner guide foot side and the outer guide foot side, the guide base extending radially between the inner guide foot side and a nozzle guide outer side, the guide base extending axially between opposing axial sides, the guide foot extending axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides to a device upstream side. In response, it is noted that Naik teaches (Figures 1-10) a nozzle guide (annotated below) coupling the injector nozzle (132) to the air swirler structure (134), the nozzle guide (annotated below) including a guide foot (annotated below), a guide base (annotated below), and an axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6), the axial air swirler (154, 216, or 252; see Figures 3-6) comprising an air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048), the guide foot (annotated below) configured to radially engage the injector nozzle (132; see Figures 3-6), the guide foot (annotated below) extending radially between an inner guide foot side (annotated below) and an outer guide foot side (annotated below), the air purge passage (Paragraphs 0039, 0046, 0048) located within the guide foot (annotated below) between the inner guide foot side (annotated below) and the outer guide foot side (annotated below), the guide base (annotated below) extending radially between the inner guide foot side (annotated below) and a nozzle guide outer side (annotated below).
PNG
media_image4.png
577
792
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As discussed in the rejection above, Al-Roub teaches (Figures 1-3) a nozzle guide (52) having an air purge passage (the passage between vanes 54; see Figures 2-3) extending across the nozzle guide (52) and axially (the passage between vanes 54 includes at least an axial component; see Figure 2) to the inner bore (the central opening formed by 40; see Figure 2), wherein the nozzle guide (52) further includes a plurality of purge passage vanes (54) and Locke teaches (Figures 1-9) a nozzle guide (164) including a guide base (annotated below); the guide base (annotated below) extends axially between opposing axial sides (the downstream axial side and the upstream axial side annotated above); and the guide foot (annotated below) extends axially beyond one of the opposing axial sides (see annotation below) to a device upstream side (annotated below).
PNG
media_image3.png
768
895
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Applicant further argues that the prior art does not teach “the air purge passage extending axially through the guide foot to the inner bore, and a trailing edge of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes spaced a first axial distance from the outlet form the air purge passage; wherein the nozzle guide projects radially within the receptacle, and the guide foot is configured to radially engage and translate along a cylindrical land surface of the injector nozzle”. In response, it is noted that Naik’s Figure 3 embodiment teaches that the air purge passage (154) will include at least an axial component (see Figure 3) as the air purge passage (154) extends axially through the guide foot (annotated above) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3).Naik also teaches, in Figures 5-6, that the air purge passage (252) can extend axially through (see Figures 5-6) the guide foot (annotated above) to the inner bore (the central passage shown at 126, between 134 and 132; see Figure 3), in a direction that is parallel to the central longitudinal axis of the fuel nozzle (232).
Sturgess teaches (Figures 1-13) a nozzle guide (42) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (44), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 44; see Figures 1-2) of a first of the plurality of purge passage vanes (44) is spaced an axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 39) from the air purge passage (39).Weinstein also teaches (Figures 1-2) a nozzle guide (36) having a plurality of purge passage vanes (54), wherein a trailing edge (the axially downstream end of 54; see Figures 1-2) of a first (one of 54) of the plurality of purge passage vanes (54) is spaced a first axial distance from (see Figures 1-2) an outlet (the downstream end of 40; see Figures 1-2) from the air purge passage (40).
Locke teaches (Figures 1-9) that the air swirler structure (64) includes a receptacle (formed by 162; see Figure 7), wherein the nozzle guide (164) projects radially within the receptacle (formed by 162; see Figure 7), and the guide foot (164) is configured to radially engage and translate axially along a cylindrical land surface of the injector nozzle (due to the radial and axial spacing of the nozzle guide 164 shown in Figure 7 and it being able to “float” and the bore is sized such that the fuel injector nozzle may slide axially along the axis relative to the nozzle guide plate so that the mount may loosely couple and locate the fuel injector nozzle to the swirler while enabling slight shifts due to differential thermal expansion as well as vibrations; see Paragraph 0065).
Therefore, Applicant’s arguments that the prior art does not teach the claimed limitations are refuted by the references.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sampath et al. (US 2020/0248903), Sandelis et al. (US 2014/0090382), Danis et al. (US 2022/0333780), Cayre et al. (US 2009/0049840), and Sablayrolles et al. (FR 2911666) each teach a receptacle for a nozzle guide to project radially into, wherein the nozzle guide is positioned within the receptacle so that the injector nozzle can move radially and axially in response to thermal expansion/contraction.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS P BURKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5407. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (571) 270-5426. 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.
/THOMAS P BURKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights