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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/9/2025 and 1/8/2026 have been entered.
This is in response to the correspondence filed on 12/9/2025 and 1/8/2026.
Claims 5, 11-12, 20 are cancelled.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant elected with traverse of Species A (Figures 3 and 5), which corresponds to claim 6, in the reply filed on 3 April 2024.
Claim 7 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected species.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umesawa JP2019-015179 in view of Uhm 20130104556.
Regarding claim 1, Umesawa teaches:
A combustor (22B Fig 5) comprising:
a combustion liner (110/120) defining a combustion chamber (within 110/120) that extends from a forward end (left side of Fig. 5) to an aft end (right side of Fig. 5);
a cap plate (Image below, Umesawa Fig. 5) defining a downstream end of a head end air plenum (Image below, Umesawa Fig. 5) and defining an upstream end of the combustion chamber (Image below);
a first air injection apparatus (inter alia, 112) disposed at a first air injection stage (110A) and fluidly coupled to a compressed fluid supply (compressor 21, see Fig. 5),
a second air injection apparatus (inter alia, 113 and its supply path) disposed at a second air injection stage (110B) and fluidly coupled to the compressed fluid supply (from 21), the second air injection stage positioned downstream of the fuel nozzle (via 25) and the first air injection stage (Fig 5).
Umesawa teaches a fuel nozzle and first air injection stage, but does not teach the configuration as claimed:
a plurality of fuel nozzles configured to convey fuel and compressed air into the combustion chamber, the plurality of fuel nozzles axially terminating at the cap plate;
the first air injection stage positioned downstream of the plurality of fuel nozzles wherein the first air injection apparatus comprises a bluff body that is circumferentially surrounded by the plurality of fuel nozzles, the bluff body having a side wall and a downstream plate, the bluff body configured to introduce only air or another working fluid of a compressor at a downstream end into the combustion chamber at the first air injection stage, wherein the side wall of the bluff body extends from an upstream end disposed in the head end air plenum, through the cap plate, to the downstream plate, and wherein the side wall is solid such that no fluid passes therethrough
However, Uhm teaches “apparatus for supplying fuel to the combustion chamber of a gas turbine engine” (abstract), and:
a plurality of fuel nozzles (34, Fig. 8) configured to convey fuel (“the fuel plenum 52 to provide convective cooling to the tubes 34 before flowing through the fuel ports 56 and into the tubes 34 to mix with the working fluid” [0028]) and compressed air (“compressed working fluid exits the compressor and flows through one or more nozzles into a combustion chamber” [0003]) into the combustion chamber (26), the plurality of fuel nozzles axially terminating at the cap plate (Image below);
[a first air injection apparatus (inter alia, 64)] disposed at a first air injection stage (Fig. 8) and fluidly coupled to a compressed fluid supply (as discussed above [0003]), the first air injection stage positioned downstream of the plurality of fuel nozzles (Image below, downstream is on the right side of the figure) wherein the first air injection apparatus comprises a bluff body that is circumferentially surrounded by the plurality of fuel nozzles (Image below), the bluff body having a side wall (Image below) and a downstream plate (Image below), the bluff body configured to introduce only air or another working fluid of a compressor (as discussed above, [0003]) at a downstream end into the combustion chamber at the first air injection stage (from 64 into 26, Fig. 8), wherein the side wall of the bluff body extends from an upstream end disposed in the head end air plenum (Image below), through the cap plate, to the downstream plate, and wherein the side wall is solid such that no fluid passes therethrough (Image below).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa with Uhm's structure discussed above in order to provide a “system for reducing combustion dynamics and NO.sub.x in a combustor” as taught by Uhm (abstract).
PNG
media_image1.png
738
1461
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1406
1451
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 1.
Umesawa in view of Uhm, as discussed so far, is silent about the bluff body extending as claimed.
However, Uhm further teaches:
the bluff body extends along an axial centerline (an axis through the center of Fig. 8 from left to right) of the combustor into the combustion chamber (26 in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 1. Umesawa further teaches:
wherein the second air injection apparatus is an air injector (113 Fig 5) coupled to the combustion liner (Fig 5) and configured to introduce air radially into the combustion chamber (Fig 5: air inlets 113 are position radially around the combustor liner, introducing air radially) at the second air injection stage (110B).
Regarding claim 8, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 1.
As discussed above, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the plurality of fuel nozzles. Umesawa further teaches:
wherein the plurality of fuel nozzles is fluidly coupled to a fuel supply system (ammonia supply pipe 25).
Regarding claim 21, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 1.
Umesawa further teaches:
The combustor as in claim 1, further comprising a forward casing (Image below) and an end cover (Image below), wherein the forward casing, the end cover, and the cap plate partially define the head end air plenum (image below)
Umesawa in view of Uhm, as discussed so far, is silent about the upstream end of the bluff body defines an inlet as claimed.
However, Uhm teaches:
the upstream end of the bluff body (Left side in Fig. 8) defines an inlet fluidly coupled to the head end air plenum (as already discussed, the upstream end disposed in the head end air plenum is indicated in the image below).
PNG
media_image3.png
738
1461
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1406
1451
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 21.
Umesawa further teaches:
further comprising:
a compressor discharge casing (100) that partially defines a high pressure plenum (image below); and
an outer sleeve (image below) spaced apart from the combustion liner (image below) such that an annulus is defined between the outer sleeve and the combustion liner (image below),
wherein the annulus fluidly couples the high pressure plenum (image below) and the head end air plenum (head end air plenum discussed above; location indicated in the image below), and
wherein the second air injection apparatus (already discussed) extends through the outer sleeve (channeling air from 21, it extends through the outer sleeve on the right side of the image below), the annulus (channeling air from 21, it extends through the annulus, see image below), and the combustion liner (through 113) and is fluidly coupled to the high pressure plenum (image below).
PNG
media_image4.png
738
1529
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umesawa JP2019-015179 in view of Uhm 20130104556 and Kappler 5003768.
Regarding claim 2, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 1.
Umesawa in view of Uhm is silent about:
further comprising a control valve fluidly coupled to the first air injection apparatus, the second air injection apparatus, and the air supply, the control valve configured to modulate an amount of air provided to the combustion chamber from the air supply at the first air injection stage and the second air injection stage.
However, Kappler teaches an air supply to a combustion chamber,
a control valve (inter alia ring 23, actuator 24, actuating member 25, Col 5 ll 53-68) fluidly coupled to the air injection apparatus (22), and the compressed fluid supply (air is supplied from the region above and adjacent to 23 in Fig 2, and air comes from compressor 1 to combustion chamber 3, see Fig 1), the control valve configured to modulate (“aperture ring is so adjusted for the starting of the gas turbine installation that the maximum opening cross section air inlet opening 22 is opened up […] the aperture ring 23 is so rotated that the air inlet openings 22 close […] For accelerating the vehicle driven by the gas turbine unit, the air supply is again increased in the second stage of the combustion chamber 3 by way of the apertured ring 23 as well as the fuel supply” Col 6 ll. 9-45, describing multiple settings for elements 22 and 23 based on different phases of the operation) an amount of air provided to the combustion chamber from the compressed fluid (Col 5 ll 53-68).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa in view of Uhm with Kappler's structure discussed above in order to provide a control valve fluidly coupled to the first air injection apparatus, the air second air injection apparatus, and the air supply, the control valve configured to control an amount of air provided to the combustion chamber from the compressed fluid supply at the first air injection stage and the second air injection stage to “For the control of the air supply into the […] stage[s] of the combustion chamber” as taught by Kappler Col 5 ll 52-68).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umesawa JP2019-015179 in view of Uhm 20130104556 and Stoia 20180363910.
Regarding claim 6, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 1.
Umesawa in view of Uhm, as discussed so far, is silent about
wherein the fuel nozzle is a bundled tube fuel nozzle defining a fuel plenum with a forward plate, an aft plate, an annular body extending between the forward plate and the aft plate, and a plurality of tubes extending from the forward plate through the fuel plenum to the aft plate.
However, Stoia teaches:
wherein the fuel nozzle is a bundled tube fuel nozzle (Fig 5, [0041-0042]) defining a fuel plenum ([0042]), with a forward plate (Image below), an aft plate (image below; also 368 [0041]), an annular body extending between the forward plate and the aft plate (body of 322, Fig 2 and Fig 5), and the plurality of tubes (522) extending from the forward plate (image below) through the fuel plenum (Fig 5, [0041-0042]) to the aft plate (Image below).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa in view of Uhm with Stoia's structure discussed above in order to provide a structure with “a plurality of individual premixing tubes 522 within which fuel and air are mixed “ [0041] where “air flowing through an inlet end of each premixing tube 522 mixes with fuel flowing through the fuel injection port(s), and a mixture of fuel and air is conveyed through an outlet end of each tube 522 [0042].
PNG
media_image5.png
854
1185
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umesawa JP2019-015179 in view of Uhm 20130104556 and Akbari 20220195919.
Regarding claim 9, Umesawa in view of Uhm teaches the invention as discussed for claim 8. Umesawa further teaches:
wherein the fuel supply system includes at least one of an ammonia supply (ammonia, which is used to generate hydrogen generated by thermal decomposition [0139]).
Umesawa in view of Uhm, does not teach ammonia and hydrogen being supplied as independent fuels.
However, Akbari teaches:
fuel supply system includes at least one of an ammonia supply and a hydrogen supply (fuel supply system Fig. 15 providing fuel to combustor 156; ammonia-hydrogen fuel mixture is fed into the burner [0002]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa in view of Uhm with Akbari 's structure discussed above “providing a zero-carbon fuel blend of ammonia and hydrogen, for powering aircraft engines, thereby enhancing existing engine power and reducing emissions” Akbari [0002].
Claim(s) 10, 13-14, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umesawa JP2019-015179 in view of Uhm 20130104556, Kappler 5003768 and Davis 20100174466.
Regarding claim 10, Umesawa teaches:
A method of operating a combustor (22B Fig 5) on alternative fuels (ammonia, hydrogen, Umesawa [0144]), the combustor comprising a combustion liner (110/120) that defines a combustion chamber (within liner 110/120) extending between a forward end (left side of Fig 5) and an aft end (right side of Fig 5, the combustor comprising a cap plate (Image below, Umesawa Fig. 5) that defines a downstream end of a head end air plenum (Image below, Umesawa Fig. 5) and that defines an upstream end of the combustion chamber (Image below, Umesawa Fig. 5); the method comprising:
providing, via a fuel nozzle (25, Fig. 5),
providing, via a first air injection apparatus (112)
a first amount of air or another working fluid of a compressor ([0134]) into the combustion chamber at a first air injection stage (110A) disposed downstream of the fuel nozzle (Fig 5),
providing, via a second air injection apparatus (113), a second amount of air ([0137]) into the combustion chamber (Fig 5) at a second air injection stage (110B), the second air injection stage disposed downstream of the first air injection stage (Fig 5);
modulating amount of air or another working fluid of the compressor and the second amount of air based on a first composition of the fuel (Umesawa teaches the amount of air introduced at 112 is less than the stoichiometric air-fuel mixture, purposefully resulting in a fuel-rich state, and the “amount of air that exceeds the amount of air required to completely burn the hydrogen generated by thermal decomposition in the downstream combustor liner 110B” [0148], teaching the amount of air introduced in each combustor portion is based on the composition of the fuel [0142-0148]).
Umesawa is silent about the fuel nozzle is configuration as claimed, and the first air injection apparatuses comprising a bluff body extending from the head end air plenum through the cap plate to the downstream plate and with solid walls as claimed., sidewall and downstream plate as claimed.
However, Uhm teaches a dual-fuel fuel nozzle (title) for a gas turbine (Fig. 1), and:
providing, via a fuel nozzle (34, Fig. 8), fuel and air to a forward end of the combustion chamber (26), the plurality of fuel nozzles axially terminating at the cap plate (Image below);
[the first air injection apparatus (inter alia, 64)] having a bluff body with a side wall (image below) and a downstream plate (image below), a first amount of air or another working fluid of a compressor into the combustion chamber with the bluff body at a first air injection stage (image below) disposed downstream of the fuel nozzle (Fig 5), wherein the bluff body is circumferentially surrounded by the plurality of fuel nozzles (image below),
wherein the side wall of the bluff body (image below) extends from an upstream (left side of the image below) end disposed in the head end air plenum (Image below), through the cap plate, to the downstream plate (image below), and wherein the side wall is solid such that no fluid passes therethrough (see sidewall in the image below);
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa with Uhm's structure discussed above in order to provide a “system for reducing combustion dynamics and NO.sub.x in a combustor” as taught by Uhm (abstract).
Umesawa in view of Uhm is silent about the modulating valve as claimed.
However, Kappler teaches
modulating a control valve (inter alia, ring 23, actuator 24, actuating member 25, Col 5 ll 53-68, and “aperture ring is so adjusted for the starting of the gas turbine installation that the maximum opening cross section air inlet opening 22 is opened up […] the aperture ring 23 is so rotated that the air inlet openings 22 close […] For accelerating the vehicle driven by the gas turbine unit, the air supply is again increased in the second stage of the combustion chamber 3 by way of the apertured ring 23 as well as the fuel supply” Col 6 ll. 9-45, describing modulating to achieve multiple settings for elements 22 and 23 based on different phases of the operation) to a first position to adjust the first amount of air or another working fluid of the compressor and the second amount of air (Col 5 ll 53-68; Kappler teaches the inner air inlet openings 22 are provided with an aperture ring 23, indicating its opening can be adjusted).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa in view of Uhm with Kappler's structure discussed above to provide “control of the air supply into the […] stage[s] of the combustion chamber” as taught by Kappler Col 5 ll 52-68).
Umesawa further teaches [0142-0148]:
modulating amount of air or another working fluid of the compressor and the second amount of air based on a first composition of the fuel (Umesawa teaches the amount of air introduced at 112 is less than the stoichiometric air-fuel mixture, purposefully resulting in a fuel-rich state, and the “amount of air that exceeds the amount of air required to completely burn the hydrogen generated by thermal decomposition in the downstream combustor liner 110B” [0148], teaching the amount of air introduced in each combustor portion is based on the composition of the fuel [0142-0148]).
As discussed above, Umesawa teaches adjusting fuel and air quantities based on stoichiometric air-fuel mixtures. Davis also teaches:
adjusting a composition of fuel from the first composition to a second composition; and modulating the control valve to a second position to adjust the first amount of air or another working fluid of the compressor and the second amount of air in response to adjusting to the second composition of fuel (“a control system coupled to the fuel circuit and configured to control relative amounts of the air to the first and second interiors and relative amounts of the first and second fuels supplied by the fuel circuit to the first and second interiors.” [0005], and “[0033] As described above, the control of the 3-way valve 110 is accomplished in order to optimize fuel to air ratios of the combustion system” [0033].)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler with Davis' structure discussed above in order to have a way to adjust the “ratios [that] may be preselected as being based on specifications for the combustor 20 and the transition zone 43 or may be based on current environmental conditions” Davis [0033].
PNG
media_image6.png
738
1461
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1406
1451
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis teaches the invention as discussed for claim 10. Umesawa further teaches
wherein, in a first operational mode, the fuel in the fuel and air provided to the combustion chamber (ammonia is introduced from the ammonia supply pipe 25 and compressed air is introduced from the air inlet 112 into the upstream combustor liner 110A [0141]) contains less than 20% hydrogen and with a fuel remainder being ammonia (ammonia is introduced from the ammonia supply pipe 25 [0141]; it is noted that hydrogen is not introduced via the ammonia supply pipe, therefore the Hydrogen content is less than 20%), wherein a sum of the first amount of air (air entering the combustor via 112) and the second amount of air (air entering the combustor via 113) is a total staging air (the amount of air obtained by subtracting the amount of air introduced into the upstream combustor liner 110A from the excess air amount is introduced from the air inlet 113 into the downstream combustor liner 110B [0148]), and
wherein the method comprises: providing, via the first air injection apparatus (112), and providing, via the second air injection apparatus, the second amount of air that is an air remainder of the total staging air (as discussed above, [0148]).
Regarding the limitation “the first amount of air that is between 0% and 10% of the total staging air”, Umesawa further teaches an amount of air that is less than the minimum amount of air required to completely burn hydrogen generated by thermal decomposition of ammonia is introduced [0148], but Umesawa in view of Uhm, as discussed so far, does not specifically teach an amount of 0% and about 10% of the total staging air. Umesawa teaches a method of reducing NOx by injecting air in stages. It is noted that “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); “The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages”, Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382, MPEP 2144.05 ILA.
Regarding claim 14, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis teaches the invention as discussed for claim 13. Umesawa further teaches
wherein, in the first operational mode, an equivalence ratio of products within the combustor is between 1 and 1.5 upstream of the first air injection stage (fuel rich state inside the upstream combustor [0141-0143], which indicates an also rich state upstream of the first air injection stage; It is noted that “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); “The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages”, Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382, MPEP 2144.05 ILA).
Regarding claim 17, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis teaches the invention as discussed for claim 10. Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis, as discussed so far, is silent about the downstream plate as claimed.
However, Uhm teaches:
wherein the downstream plate is configured to introduce only air into the combustion chamber at the first air injection stage (Fig. 8)
Regarding claim 18, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis teaches the invention as discussed for claim 10. Umesawa further teaches:
wherein the second air injection apparatus is an air injector (113 Fig 5) coupled to the combustion liner (Fig 5) and configured to introduce air radially into the combustion chamber (Fig 5: air inlets 113 are position radially around the combustor liner, introducing air radially) at the second air injection stage (110B).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umesawa JP2019-015179 in view of Uhm 20130104556 and Kappler 5003768
Regarding claim 19, Umesawa teaches:
A combustor (22B Fig 5) comprising:
a combustion liner (110/120) defining a combustion chamber (within 110/120) that extends from a forward end (left side of Fig. 5) to an aft end (right side of Fig. 5);
a cap plate (Image below, Umesawa Fig. 5) defining a downstream end of a head end air plenum (Image below, Umesawa Fig. 5) and defining an upstream end of the combustion chamber (Image below);
a first air injection apparatus (inter alia, 112) disposed at a first air injection stage (110A) and fluidly coupled to a compressed fluid supply (compressor 21, see Fig. 5),
a second air injection apparatus (inter alia, 113 and its supply path) disposed at a second air injection stage (110B) and fluidly coupled to the compressed fluid supply (from 21), the second air injection stage positioned downstream of the fuel nozzle (via 25) and the first air injection stage (Fig 5).
Umesawa teaches a fuel nozzle and first air injection stage, but does not teach the configuration as claimed:
a plurality of fuel nozzles disposed at a forward end of the combustion chamber, the plurality of fuel nozzles axially terminating at the cap plate;
the first air injection stage positioned downstream of the plurality of fuel nozzles wherein the first air injection apparatus comprises a bluff body that is circumferentially surrounded by the plurality of fuel nozzles, the bluff body having a side wall and a downstream plate, the bluff body configured to introduce only air or another working fluid of a compressor at a downstream end into the combustion chamber at the first air injection stage, wherein the side wall of the bluff body extends from an upstream end disposed in the head end air plenum, through the cap plate, to the downstream plate, and wherein the side wall is solid such that no fluid passes therethrough
However, Uhm teaches “apparatus for supplying fuel to the combustion chamber of a gas turbine engine” (abstract), and:
a plurality of fuel nozzles (34, Fig. 8) disposed at a forward end of the combustion chamber (left side of 26 in Fig 1, and right side of Fig. 8), the plurality of fuel nozzles axially terminating at the cap plate (Image below);
[a first air injection apparatus (inter alia, 64)] disposed at a first air injection stage (Fig. 8) and fluidly coupled to a compressed fluid supply (“compressed working fluid exits the compressor and flows through one or more nozzles into a combustion chamber” [0003]), the first air injection stage positioned downstream of the plurality of fuel nozzles (Image below, downstream is on the right side of the figure) wherein the first air injection apparatus comprises a bluff body that is circumferentially surrounded by the plurality of fuel nozzles (see 20 in relation to 40 in Fig. 2), the bluff body having a side wall (Image below) and a downstream plate (Image below), the bluff body configured to introduce only air or another working fluid of a compressor (as discussed above, [0003]) at a downstream end into the combustion chamber at the first air injection stage (from 64 into 26, Fig. 8), wherein the side wall of the bluff body extends from an upstream end disposed in the head end air plenum (Image below), through the cap plate, to the downstream plate, and wherein the side wall is solid such that no fluid passes therethrough (Image below).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa with Uhm's structure discussed above in order to provide a “system for reducing combustion dynamics and NO.sub.x in a combustor” as taught by Uhm (abstract).
PNG
media_image1.png
738
1461
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
1406
1451
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umesawa JP2019-015179 in view of Uhm 20130104556, Kappler 5003768, Davis 20100174466 and Kapat 20240102657.
Regarding claim 15, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis teaches the invention as discussed for claim 10. Umesawa further teaches:
in a second operational mode, the fuel in fuel and air provided to the combustion chamber contains ammonia (ammonia is introduced from the ammonia supply pipe 25 and compressed air is introduced from the air inlet 112 into the upstream combustor liner 110A [0141], which is broken down into Hydrogen),
wherein a sum of the first amount of air or another working fluid (air entering the combustor via 112) and the second amount of air (air entering the combustor via 113) is a total staging air (the amount of air obtained by subtracting the amount of air introduced into the upstream combustor liner 110A from the excess air amount is introduced from the air inlet 113 into the downstream combustor liner 110B [0148]), and wherein the method comprises:
providing, via the first air injection apparatus (112), the first amount of air; and
providing, via the second air injection apparatus (113), the second amount of air that is an air remainder of the total staging air (as discussed above, [0148]).
Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis, is silent about
the fuel in fuel and air provided to the combustion chamber contains between 20% and 30% hydrogen and with a fuel remainder being ammonia.
However, Kapat teaches a combusting hydrogen and ammonia [0101], claim 9, claim 22, and:
the fuel provided to the combustion chamber contains about 30% hydrogen (30% to 70% [0101]) and with a fuel remainder being ammonia (30% to 70% [0101]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler and Davis with Kapat's structure discussed above in order to “in order to reduce NO.sub.x and also to reduce the very exothermic nature of the H.sub.2 combustion in the engine, that the separation unit be removed, and that the output of the cracking unit be a mixture of H.sub.2, N.sub.2 and a substantial amount of NH.sub.3 that is transmitted to the combustor of the engine to be combusted together. The presence of the NH.sub.3 reduces the NO.sub.x, and the presence of NH.sub.3 and N.sub.2 in the combustor reduces the temperature of the combustion of the H.sub.2, which may be beneficial to the engine components or to the operation of the engine”, Kapat [0101].
Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler, Davis and Kapat, as discussed so far, does not specifically teach “between 20% and 50% of the total staging air”.
However, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler, Davis and Kapat teaches a method of reducing NOx by injecting air in stages. It is noted that “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); “The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages”, Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382, MPEP 2144.05 ILA.
Regarding claim 16, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler, Davis and Kapat teaches the invention as discussed for claim 15. Umesawa further teaches:
an equivalence ratio of products within the combustor is above 1 upstream of the second air injection stage (fuel rich state inside the upstream combustor [0141-0143]).
Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler, Davis and Kapat, as discussed so far, does not explicitly teach:
wherein, in the second operational mode, an equivalence ratio of products within the combustor is between 1 and 1.5 upstream of the second air injection stage (ie, it does not explicitly teach the 1.5 limit). However, Umesawa in view of Uhm, Kappler, Davis and Kapat teaches the invention as discussed so far, and it is noted that “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); “The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages”, Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382, MPEP 2144.05 ILA).
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Applicant’s arguments have been considered, but they are not persuasive because they do not apply to the new combination of references, i.e., adding a new reference to the old combination of references, that was necessitated by applicant’s amendment. However, to the extent possible, applicant’s arguments have been addressed in the body of the rejections above, at the appropriate location.
Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Roberto T. Igue whose telephone number is (303)297-4389. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30 PT.
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.
/ROBERTO TOSHIHARU IGUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/PHUTTHIWAT WONGWIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights