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 .
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 skin fiber plies flaring outward and being discontinuous with the platform plies (claim 1 and 13) 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 Objections
Claim 15, lines 1, 5 are objected to because of the following informalities: “the innermost core fiber ply” should be - -the innermost core fiber plies- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15, lines 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “end regions each of the respective” should be - -end regions of each of the respective- -. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 10 is 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 10 recites “The airfoil as recited in claim 9” which renders the claim indefinite because claim 9 is cancelled, so that it is unclear what claim claim 10 depends on. For purposes of examination, claim 10 is also cancelled.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-13, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellis et al (US 20120082549 as referenced in OA dated 9/8/2025) in view of Underwood et al (US 20190338660) and Sippel et al (US 20160230568)
PNG
media_image1.png
410
636
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 11 of Ellis
PNG
media_image2.png
417
624
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 7A of Underwood
PNG
media_image3.png
390
468
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2 of Sippel
Regarding claim 1, Ellis discloses an airfoil (Figure 6) comprising:
a platform (Figure 11; 110, 132); and
an airfoil section (Figure 6; 102) extending from the platform, the airfoil section including first and second internal cavities (Figure 7; 116 feeding 148 and 116 fed from 149),
first and second radial tubes (The tubes forming the first and second cavities),
at least one closed-circuit cooling passage (Figure 7; 116 feeding 148, to 148, to 138, to 133, to 139 to 149 to 116 fed from 149) defined in the airfoil, the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage initiating from the first internal cavity, extending within the platform, and ending at the second internal cavity,
wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side (The top side of the platform in Figure 1) of the platform, the platform include first and second platform layers (Annotated Figure 11; labeled first and second layer), and at least one intermediate platform layer (Annotated Figure 11; labeled intermediate layer) between the first and second platform fiber plies, and first and second collection channels (The portions of Figure 7; 148 and 149 through the platform, respectively) of the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage are laterally bound by the at least one intermediate platform layer.
Ellis does not disclose the airfoil section and the platform being formed of a ceramic matrix composite (CMC) having fiber plies and a ceramic matrix, the fiber plies including:
first and second groups of core fiber plies respectively defining first and second radial tubes, the first and second radial tubes circumscribing, respectively, the first and second internal cavities,
skin fiber plies defining an exterior of the airfoil section, the skin fiber plies wrapping around the first and second groups of core fiber plies and flaring outwardly through a fillet into the platform,
platform fiber plies extending in the platform adjacent the skin fiber plies, the platform plies discontinuous with the skin fiber plies and discontinuous with the core fiber plies; and,
at least one closed-circuit cooling passage defined in the fiber plies,
wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side of the platform, the platform fiber plies include first and second platform fiber plies, and at least one intermediate platform fiber ply between the first and second platform fiber plies, and first and second collection channels of the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage are laterally bound by the at least one intermediate platform fiber ply.
However, Underwood teaches an airfoil (Figure 3; 60, Paragraph 0059) comprising:
a platform (Figure 3; 64); and
an airfoil section (Figure 3; 62, Paragraph 0059) extending from the platform, the airfoil section including a first internal cavity (Figure 3; 80), the airfoil section and the platform being formed of a ceramic matrix composite (CMC) (Paragraph 0064) having fiber plies (Figure 7A; 96 of 62) and a ceramic matrix (Paragraph 0004), the fiber plies including:
a first group of core fiber plies (Annotated Figure 7A; labeled core plies) respectively defining a first radial tube (The tube defined by the first group of core fiber plies), the first radial tube circumscribing, respectively, the first internal cavity,
skin fiber plies (Annotated Figure 7A; labeled skin plies) defining an exterior (The exterior of the airfoil section) of the airfoil section, the skin fiber plies wrapping around the first group of core fiber plies,
platform fiber plies (Figure 7A; 96 of 64) extending in the platform adjacent the skin fiber plies, the platform plies discontinuous with the skin fiber plies and discontinuous with the core fiber plies; and
wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side (The topside of the platform in Figure 3) of the platform, the platform fiber plies include first and second platform fiber plies (The topmost and bottommost fiber plies), and at least one intermediate platform fiber ply (The plies between the first and second platform fiber plies) between the first and second platform fiber plies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis wherein the airfoil section and the platform being formed of a ceramic matrix composite (CMC) having fiber plies and a ceramic matrix, the fiber plies including: a first group of core fiber plies respectively defining first radial tube, the first radial tube circumscribing, respectively, the first internal cavity, skin fiber plies defining an exterior of the airfoil section, the skin fiber plies wrapping around the first group of core fiber plies, platform fiber plies extending in the platform adjacent the skin fiber plies, the platform plies discontinuous with the skin fiber plies and discontinuous with the core fiber plies; wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side of the platform, the platform fiber plies include first and second platform fiber plies, and at least one intermediate platform fiber ply between the first and second platform fiber plies as taught by and suggested by Underwood in order to provide strength and toughness (Paragraph 0006, the modification uses CMC material to form the interlocking joint of Underwood in Ellis).
It is herein asserted that the combined invention of Ellis in view of Underwood has a second groups of core fiber plies respectively defining a second radial tube, the second radial tube circumscribing, respectively, the second internal cavity because the second internal cavity and second radial tube of Ellis is formed in the same way as the first internal cavity and first radial tube of Underwood, has the skin fiber plies wrapping around the second group of core fiber plies because the skin fiber plies of Underwood defines the exterior of the airfoil section of Underwood, has at least one closed-circuit cooling passage defined in the fiber plies because the airfoil of Ellis is made of fiber plies, so that the closed-circuit cooling passage is defined in the fiber plies, and has first and second collection channels of the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage are laterally bound by the at least one intermediate platform fiber ply because the layers of Ellis are made from plies as taught by Underwood.
Ellis in view of Underwood does not teach the skin fiber plies flaring outwardly through a fillet into the platform.
However, Sippel teaches skin fiber plies (Annotated Figure 2; labeled skin plies) flaring outwardly through a fillet (Annotated Figure 2; labeled fillet) into a platform (Figure 2; 52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis in view of Underwood wherein the skin fiber plies flaring outwardly through a fillet into the platform as taught by and suggested by Sippel because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Sippel’s use of a fillet according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Ellis in view of Underwood’s airfoil, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case reducing stress, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification uses a fillet to form Annotated Figure 7A; labeled corner of Underwood).
Regarding claim 2, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage includes a serpentine channel (Figure 7; 133) along the platform (In the combined invention of Ellis in view of Underwood and Sippel, this serpentine channel is formed in the platform fiber plies).
Regarding claim 3, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage includes a platform passage section (Figure 7; 138, 133, 139) in the platform, the platform passage section having an exchange region (Annotated Figure 11; labeled exchange region) that extends through two platform layers (Figure 11; 110 and 132. In the context of Ellis in view of Underwood and Sippel each of 110 and 132 is made of the platform plies, so that 110 and 132, which are made of plies, are the two platform fiber plies) and connects legs (Figure 11; 133, 149) of the platform passage section that are radially offset from each other.
Regarding claim 4, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage including an inlet orifice (The portion of Figure 7; 148 through the airfoil) that opens to the first internal cavity and an outlet orifice (The portion of Figure 7; 149 through the airfoil) that opens to the second internal cavity.
Ellis does not disclose wherein each of the first and second groups of core fiber plies include, relative to the first and second internal cavities, an innermost core fiber ply, an outermost core fiber ply, and at least one intermediate core fiber ply between the innermost core fiber ply and the outermost core fiber ply.
However, Burdette teaches wherein each of the first group of core fiber plies include, relative to the first internal cavity, an innermost core fiber ply (The innermost core fiber ply of the first group of core fiber plies), an outermost core fiber ply (The outermost core fiber ply of the first group of core fiber plies) and at least one intermediate core fiber ply (The intermediate core fiber ply between the innermost and outermost core fiber flies of the first group of core fiber plies) between the innermost core fiber ply and the outermost core fiber ply.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis wherein each of the first group of core fiber plies include, relative to the first internal cavity, an innermost core fiber ply, an outermost core fiber ply, and at least one intermediate core fiber ply between the innermost core fiber ply and the outermost core fiber ply as taught by and suggested by Underwood in order to provide strength and toughness (Paragraph 0006, This is the same modification as claim 1).
It is herein asserted that the combined invention of Ellis in view of Underwood has wherein each of the second group of core fiber plies include, relative to the second internal cavity, an innermost core fiber ply, an outermost core fiber ply, and at least one intermediate core fiber ply between the innermost core fiber ply and the outermost core fiber because the second internal cavity and second radial tube of Ellis is formed in the same way was the first internal cavity.
Regarding claim 5, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein each of the first and second radial tubes have a radial end region (The end regions of the radial tubes that extend into the platform. Paragraph 0031) that extends into the platform, and the inlet and outlet orifices are located in the radial end region (Figure 11 shows 149 being purely horizontal, so that it is located in the radial end region. Paragraph 0041 states 148 uses the same configuration).
Regarding claim 6, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage includes a platform passage section (Figure 7; 138, 133, 139) in the platform, the platform passage section connecting the inlet orifice to the outlet orifice.
Regarding claim 7, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein the first and second collection channels extending from, respectively, the inlet orifice and the outlet orifice, and a serpentine channel (Figure 7; 133) connecting the first and second collection channels.
Regarding claim 10, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein the serpentine channel is laterally bound by the first platform layer (Annotated Figure 11; labeled first layer. In the context of Ellis in view of Underwood and Sippel, this layer of Ellis are formed by platform plies. The plies making the first layer are the first platform ply).
Regarding claim 11, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage includes first and second exchange regions (Annotated Figure 11; labeled exchanger region and the similar structure for 148. Paragraph 0041 states 148 uses the same configuration), the first exchange region connecting the first collection channel to the serpentine channel, the second exchange region connecting the serpentine channel to the second collection channel, each of the first and second exchange regions is laterally bound by the first platform layer (Annotated Figure 11; labeled first layer. In the context of Ellis in view of Underwood and Sippel, this layer of Ellis are formed by platform plies. The plies making the first layer are the first platform ply) and the at least one intermediate platform layer (The layers denoted by dotted lines between the first and second layer. In the context of Ellis in view of Underwood and Sippel, these layers of Ellis are formed by platform plies. The plies making each of the intermediate layers are intermediate platform fiber plies).
Regarding claim 12, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses wherein, relative to each other, the first cavity is a high- pressure cavity (Figure 7; 148 is a high pressure connector, per Paragraph 0036, so that the 116 it is attached to is a high-pressure cavity) and the second cavity is a low-pressure cavity (Figure 7; 149 is a low pressure connector, per Paragraph 0036, so that the 116 it is attached to is a low-pressure cavity).
Regarding claim 13, Ellis discloses a gas turbine engine (Paragraph 0001, 0002) comprising:
a compressor section (The compressor of Paragraph 0002);
a combustor (The combustor of Paragraph 0002) in fluid communication with the compressor section; and
a turbine section (The turbine of Paragraph 0002) in fluid communication with the combustor, the turbine section having an airfoil (Figure 6. Paragraph 0013) comprising:
a platform (Figure 11; 110, 132); and
an airfoil section (Figure 6; 102) extending from the platform, the airfoil section including first and second internal cavities (Figure 7; 116 feeding 148 and 116 fed from 149),
at least one closed-circuit cooling passage (Figure 7; 116 feeding 148, to 148, to 138, to 133, to 139 to 149 to 116 fed from 149) defined in the fiber plies, the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage initiating from the first internal cavity, extending within the platform, and ending at the second internal cavity,
wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side (The top side of the platform in Figure 1) of the platform, the platform include first and second platform layers (Annotated Figure 11; labeled first and second layer), and at least one intermediate platform layer (Annotated Figure 11; labeled intermediate layer) between the first and second platform fiber plies, and first and second collection channels (The portions of Figure 7; 148 and 149 through the platform, respectively) of the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage are laterally bound by the at least one intermediate platform layer.
Ellis does not disclose the airfoil section and the platform being formed of a ceramic matrix composite (CMC) having fiber plies and a ceramic matrix, the fiber plies including:
first and second groups of core fiber plies respectively defining first and second radial tubes, the first and second radial tubes circumscribing, respectively, the first and second internal cavities,
skin fiber plies defining an exterior of the airfoil section, the skin fiber plies wrapping around the first and second groups of core fiber plies and flaring outwardly through a fillet into the platform,
platform fiber plies extending in the platform adjacent the skin fiber plies, the platform plies discontinuous with the skin fiber plies and discontinuous with the core fiber plies; and
at least one closed-circuit cooling passage defined in the fiber plies,
wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side of the platform, the platform fiber plies include first and second platform fiber plies, and at least one intermediate platform fiber ply between the first and second platform fiber plies, and first and second collection channels of the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage are laterally bound by the at least one intermediate platform fiber ply.
However, Underwood teaches an airfoil (Figure 3; 60, Paragraph 0059) comprising:
a platform (Figure 3; 64); and
an airfoil section (Figure 3; 62, Paragraph 0059) extending from the platform, the airfoil section including a first internal cavity (Figure 3; 80), the airfoil section and the platform being formed of a ceramic matrix composite (CMC) (Paragraph 0064) having fiber plies (Figure 7A; 96 of 62) and a ceramic matrix (Paragraph 0004), the fiber plies including:
a first group of core fiber plies (Annotated Figure 7A; labeled core plies) respectively defining a first radial tube (The tube defined by the first group of core fiber plies), the first radial tube circumscribing, respectively, the first internal cavity,
skin fiber plies (Annotated Figure 7A; labeled skin plies) defining an exterior (The exterior of the airfoil section) of the airfoil section, the skin fiber plies wrapping around the first group of core fiber plies,
platform fiber plies (Figure 7A; 96 of 64) extending in the platform adjacent the skin fiber plies, the platform plies discontinuous with the skin fiber plies and discontinuous with the core fiber plies; and
wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side (The topside of the platform in Figure 3) of the platform, the platform fiber plies include first and second platform fiber plies (The topmost and bottommost fiber plies), and at least one intermediate platform fiber ply (The plies between the first and second platform fiber plies) between the first and second platform fiber plies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis wherein the airfoil section and the platform being formed of a ceramic matrix composite (CMC) having fiber plies and a ceramic matrix, the fiber plies including: a first group of core fiber plies respectively defining first radial tube, the first radial tube circumscribing, respectively, the first internal cavity, skin fiber plies defining an exterior of the airfoil section, the skin fiber plies wrapping around the first group of core fiber plies, platform fiber plies extending in the platform adjacent the skin fiber plies, the platform plies discontinuous with the skin fiber plies and discontinuous with the core fiber plies; wherein, with respect to radial proximity to a gaspath side of the platform, the platform fiber plies include first and second platform fiber plies, and at least one intermediate platform fiber ply between the first and second platform fiber plies as taught by and suggested by Underwood in order to provide strength and toughness (Paragraph 0006, the modification uses CMC material to form the interlocking joint of Underwood in Ellis).
It is herein asserted that the combined invention of Ellis in view of Underwood has a second groups of core fiber plies respectively defining a second radial tube, the second radial tube circumscribing, respectively, the second internal cavity because the second internal cavity and second radial tube of Ellis is formed in the same way as the first internal cavity and first radial tube of Underwood, has the skin fiber plies wrapping around the second group of core fiber plies because the skin fiber plies of Underwood defines the exterior of the airfoil section of Underwood, has at least one closed-circuit cooling passage defined in the fiber plies because the airfoil of Ellis is made of fiber plies, so that the closed-circuit cooling passage is defined in the fiber plies, and has first and second collection channels of the at least one closed-circuit cooling passage are laterally bound by the at least one intermediate platform fiber ply because the layers of Ellis are made from plies as taught by Underwood.
Ellis in view of Underwood does not teach the skin fiber plies flaring outwardly through a fillet into the platform.
However, Sippel teaches skin fiber plies (Annotated Figure 2; labeled skin plies) flaring outwardly through a fillet (Annotated Figure 2; labeled fillet) into a platform (Figure 2; 52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis in view of Underwood wherein the skin fiber plies flaring outwardly through a fillet into the platform as taught by and suggested by Sippel because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Sippel’s use of a fillet according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Ellis in view of Underwood’s airfoil, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case reducing stress, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification uses a fillet to form Annotated Figure 7A; labeled corner of Underwood).
Regarding claim 15, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis further discloses the inlet and outlet orifices are located in radial end regions (The radial inner end regions of the first and second cavities which are the portions radially at the platform. Paragraph 0041).
Ellis does not disclose wherein the innermost core fiber plies extends radially beyond the skin fiber plies and defines radial end regions of each of the respective first and second radial tubes, the radial end regions extending into the platform and the skin fiber plies stopping at the platform, and the inlet and outlet orifices extend through the innermost core fiber plies.
However, Underwood teaches wherein the innermost core fiber plies extends radially beyond the skin fiber plies and defines a radial end region (The radial end regions of the innermost core fiber ply is the portion that extends into the platform) of each of the respective first radial tube, the radial end region extending into the platform and the skin fiber plies stopping at the platform.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis wherein the innermost core fiber plies extends radially beyond the skin fiber plies and defines a radial end region of each of the respective first radial tube, the radial end region extending into the platform and the skin fiber plies stopping at the platform as taught by and suggested by Underwood in order to provide strength and toughness (Paragraph 0006, this is the same modification a claim 1).
It is herein asserted that Ellis in view of Underwood has wherein the innermost core fiber ply extends radially beyond the skin fiber plies and defines a radial end region of each of the second radial tube, the radial end region extending into the platform and the skin fiber plies stopping at the platform because the second internal cavity and second radial tube of Ellis is formed in the same way as the first internal cavity and first radial tube of Underwood and has the inlet and outlet orifices extend through the innermost core fiber ply because the inlet and outlet orifice are in fluid communication with the first and second internal cavities, so that the inlet and outlet orifices need to penetrate through the innermost core fiber plies.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Harris et al (US 20120107134 as referenced in OA dated 9/8/2025).
Regarding claim 8, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel does not teach wherein the platform includes cooling holes along the platform passage section.
However, Harris teaches wherein a platform (Figure 7; 110) includes cooling holes (Figure 7; 157) along a platform passage section (Figure 7; 133).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel wherein the platform includes cooling holes along the platform passage section as taught by and suggested by Harris in order to provide film cooling to the platform (Paragraph 0040, the modification adds cooling holes along the platform passage section).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Decesare et al (US 20210189889).
Regarding claim 14, Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel teaches the invention as claimed.
Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel does not teach wherein the platform and the airfoil section are of a vane.
However, Decesare teaches wherein a platform (Figure 1; 18) and an airfoil section (Figure 1; 12) are of a vane (Paragraph 0033).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int heart at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Ellis in view of Underwood in view of Sippel wherein the platform and the airfoil section are of a vane as taught by and suggested by Decesare because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Decesare’s manufacturing of a vane according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Ellis in view of Underwood and Sippel’s airfoil, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case making a vane, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has the airfoil being a vane).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that the channels are Ellis are defined in a plate connected to the platform. Examiner respectfully disagrees. In this new interpretation of Ellis, the platform is Figure 11; 110, 132, so that the cooling channels are in the platform.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Karkos et al (US 10557361) states in Column 10, lines 61-66 states that fillets reduce stress than sharp angles
Coupe et al (US 20130108422) teaches in Paragraph 0002 that blades and vanes are formed similarly
Shi et al (US 20180251921) teaches in Paragraph 0026 that blades and vanes are formed similarly
Darkins et al (US 20120163979) teaches in Paragraph 0031 that blades and vanes are formed similarly
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN G KANG whose telephone number is (571)272-9814. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 PM EST.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/EDWIN KANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741