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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-7, 10-11, 15, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ajami et al [20200088103], further in view of Kim [6281640].
With respect to claim 1, Ajami discloses: A light-off detector instrumentation translator comprising: a hardware enclosure (60); a first interface (66) structured to receive an excitation signal and to deliver afterburner condition data indicative of an afterburner condition of a gas turbine engine to an engine controller of the gas turbine engine [paragraph 0045]; a second interface (166A) structured to receive light-off data from a light-off detector (LOD) (168) [paragraph 0052]; and a translator controller (166B) [paragraph 0055-0056].
Ajami however does not show the translator controller as further claimed.
Kim makes up for these deficiencies by teaching:
{cl. 1, cont’d} a translator controller (100) configured to: convert the excitation signal to an LOD power (12) [col 2, line 30-41]; transduce the light-off data to the afterburner condition data using a signal converter [col 2, line 56-col 3, line 6]; and provide power to the signal converter [col 2, line 42-55].
Kim further teaches:
{cl. 2} The light-off detector instrumentation translator of claim 1, which further includes a power converter, wherein the power converter is structured to provide power to the signal converter and provide power to an LOD sensing device [see abstract, col 1, line 43-60].
{cl. 3} The light-off detector instrumentation translator of claim 1, wherein the signal converter includes a voltage to frequency converter structured to receive a direct current (DC) voltage generated by the LOD and to convert the DC voltage to an alternating current (AC) voltage [col 2, line 42-55].
{cl. 6} The light-off detector instrumentation translator of claim 1, which further includes the LOD (12) [col 2, line 31-41].
{cl. 7} The light-off detector instrumentation translator of claim 1, wherein the translator controller is a programmable controller and further includes a switch configured to include a plurality of switch settings corresponding to at least one of a respective plurality of sensor types of the LOD and a threshold voltage to frequency output [col 3, line 18-40].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Ajami to include the controller of Kim because the controller of Kim provides power without an additional power supply, therein limiting the components of the system.
With respect to claim 10, Ajami discloses: A gas turbine engine control comprising: a light-off detector (LOD) (60, 66) configured to detect light-off condition of an afterburner of a gas turbine engine, the light-off detector structured to output a light-off data, the light-off data indicative of an afterburning condition of the gas turbine engine [paragraph 0045]; an engine controller (166) configured to modulate a fuel flow to the afterburner of the gas turbine engine [paragraph 0059, with reference to “The controller 166 can be programmed in a number of ways to modulate the valve assembly 164 for light-off and an acceleration sequence of the engine 120.”]; and an LOD instrumentation translator (166B) structured to transduce the light-off data from the LOD to an afterburner condition data for use in the engine controller of the gas turbine engine [paragraph 0052, 0055-0056].
Ajami further shows:
{cl. 11} The gas turbine engine control of claim 10, wherein the LOD instrumentation translator is coupled with the engine controller via a first interface (66) structured to receive an excitation signal from the engine controller and to deliver afterburner condition data to the engine controller [paragraph 0045].
{cl. 15} The gas turbine engine control of claim 10, wherein the translator controller is a programmable controller [paragraph 0051].
Ajami however does not show the translator controller as further claimed.
Kim makes up for these deficiencies by teaching:
{cl. 10, cont’d} the LOD instrumentation translator having a translator controller (100) configured to: provide power (12) to enable sampling of light-off data from the LOD [col 2, line 30-41]; transduce the light-off data to the afterburner condition data using a signal converter [col 2, line 56-col 3, line 6]; and provide power to the signal converter [col 2, line 42-55].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Ajami to include the controller of Kim because the controller of Kim provides power without an additional power supply, therein limiting the components of the system.
With respect to claim 18, Ajami discloses: A method comprising: receiving an excitation signal useful to power a light-off detector (LOD) instrumentation translator (60, 66); receiving light-off data from a LOD coupled to the LOD instrumentation translator, the light-off data indicative of an afterburning condition of a gas turbine engine [paragraph 0045]; and transmitting the afterburner condition data to an engine controller of a gas turbine engine [paragraph 0052, 0055-0056].
Ajami however does not show the translator controller as further claimed.
Kim makes up for these deficiencies by teaching:
{cl. 18, cont’d} converting, by the LOD instrumentation translator, the excitation signal to an LOD power for powering the LOD [col 2, line 30-41]; transducing, by the LOD instrumentation translator, the light-off data to an afterburner condition data [col 2, line 42-col 3, line 6].
Kim further teaches:
{cl. 19} The method of claim 18, which further includes converting the excitation signal to a device excitation to an LOD sensing device [col 3, line 18-40].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Ajami to include the controller of Kim because the controller of Kim provides power without an additional power supply, therein limiting the components of the system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 8-9, 11-14, 16-17 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The further limitations of the LOD are not found to be obvious in the art. For example, the signal converter as taught by the prior art does not teach a voltage driver or a converter that has switchable communication.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AVINASH A SAVANI whose telephone number is (571)270-3762. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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.
/AVINASH A SAVANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
12/10/2025