FINAL 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 .
This is the second office action on the merits. This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 12/05/2025. Applicant has amended claims 1 and 4-10 and cancelled claims 2-3 and 11. Claims 12-20 remain withdrawn from further consideration. Claims 1 and 4-10 are pending and examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 6, 10, and 15: “an inner radial flange” (line 6) and “the combustor inner radial flange” (lines 10 and 15) are believed to refer to the same element. Either change the first limitation to “a combustor inner radial flange” or change the second limitation to “the inner radial flange”.
Claim 4, lines 3-4: “the diffuser ID flow path” is believed to be in error for --the diffuser ID gas flow path-- (see claim 1, lines 13-14)
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blanchard (US 8,336,317 B2), in view of Prenter (US 2022/0018540 A1: IDS reference), and as evidenced by Binek (US 2021/0102704 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Blanchard teaches (Fig. 1) a gas turbine engine (col. 3, l. 45) having an axial centerline (inherent in a gas turbine engine), comprising:
a compressor section (10);
a turbine section (16) having a turbine first vane assembly (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) that includes an annular first vane inner radial support (annular FV inner radial support) (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page); and
a combustor section (14) having an outer casing (40), an annular combustor (14), and an inner diffuser structure (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page), wherein the annular combustor (14) has an inner radial flange (42), and wherein the inner diffuser structure includes a compressor discharge (12), an inner diffuser case (24 and see annotated Fig. 1 on next page), and a tangential onboard injector (TOBI) (44) attached to one another (Fig. 1 shows all three components are attached to one another), the inner diffuser structure further including an outer radial flange (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) and a TOBI connection flange (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page);
wherein the annular FV inner radial support, the combustor inner radial flange (42), and the TOBI connection flange are secured to one another (via a fastener, as shown in annotated Fig. 1 on next page);
wherein the annular combustor (14) includes an inner radial wall structure (32), and the inner diffuser case and the inner radial wall structure (32) define a portion of a diffuser inner diameter (ID) gas flow path (56); and
wherein the annular FV inner radial support, the combustor inner radial flange (42), and the TOBI connection flange are secured to one another by couplings (in this case, the coupling is a fastener as shown in annotated Fig. 1 on next page. Note that since the combustor is annular, there will be more than one fastener), and the couplings are disposed inside a radially inner boundary (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) of the diffuser ID gas flow path (56) – (as shown in annotated Fig. 1, the fasteners are located beneath, or inside, the radially inner boundary).
PNG
media_image1.png
600
873
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Blanchard does not teach that the inner diffuser structure is a unitary inner diffuser structure such that the compressor discharge, the inner diffuser case, and the TOBI are inseparably attached to one another, and further including the outer radial flange and the TOBI connection flange.
Prenter teaches (Fig. 2) a similar gas turbine engine (10 – Fig. 1) comprising:
a combustor section (20) having a unitary inner diffuser structure (88), wherein the unitary inner diffuser structure (88) includes a compressor discharge (see annotated Fig. 2 on next page), an inner diffuser case (84), and a TOBI (116) inseparably attached to one another (as shown by the shared cross-section of the annotated structures), the unitary inner diffuser structure (88) further including an outer radial flange (see annotated Fig. 2 on next page) and a TOBI connection flange (see annotated Fig. 2 on next page).
PNG
media_image2.png
671
941
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date to modify Blanchard by manufacturing the inner diffuser structure to be a unitary inner diffuser structure such that the compressor discharge, the inner diffuser case, and the TOBI are inseparably attached to one another, and further including the outer radial flange and a TOBI connection flange, as taught by Prenter, in order to simplify manufacturing, reduce the time to delivery to the customer, and lower the overall production costs of the unit (as evidenced by Binek, ¶ [0011]).
Furthermore, it has been held that “[T]he patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process”; In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985), MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 4, Blanchard, in view of Prenter and as evidenced by Binek, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Blanchard further teaches (Fig. 1) the couplings include a plurality of fasteners (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 on page 5. Since the combustor is annular, there will be more than one fastener), and wherein each of the plurality of fasteners has a centerline (inherent) that is disposed inside the radially inner boundary (see annotated Fig. 1 on page 5) of the diffuser ID flow path (56) – (since the entire fastener is shown to be inside the radially inner boundary, the centerline of said fastener will also be inside the radially inner boundary).
Regarding claim 5, Blanchard, in view of Prenter and as evidenced by Binek, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Blanchard further teaches (Fig. 1) the couplings are disposed radially outside of a leakage gas flow path (62) disposed between the inner diffuser case (see annotated Fig. 1 below) and an aft compressor hub (see annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
592
855
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Blanchard, in view of Prenter and as evidenced by Binek, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 5, and Blanchard further teaches (Fig. 1) the couplings (see annotated Fig. 1 on previous page) are disposed on an outer radial side of the TOBI (44) – (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 on previous page, the couplings are disposed radially above TOBI 44).
Regarding claim 7, Blanchard, in view of Prenter and as evidenced by Binek, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 6, and Blanchard further teaches (Fig. 1) the couplings comprise a plurality of fasteners (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 on previous page. Since the combustor is annular, there will be more than one fastener).
Regarding claim 8, Blanchard teaches (Fig. 1) a gas turbine engine (col. 3, l. 45) having an outer casing (40), and an axial centerline (inherent in a gas turbine engine), comprising:
a compressor section (10);
a turbine section (16) having a turbine first vane assembly module (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) that includes an annular first vane inner radial support (annular FV inner radial support) (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) coupled to a plurality of stator vanes (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page. Since the turbine section is annular, there will be more than one stator vane); and
a combustor section (14) having an annular combustor module (14) and an inner diffuser structure module (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page), the annular combustor module (14) having an inner radial flange (42), and the inner diffuser structure module including a compressor discharge (12), an inner diffuser case (24 and see annotated Fig. 1 on next page), and a tangential onboard injector (TOBI) (44) attached to one another (Fig. 1 shows all three components are attached to one another), the inner diffuser structure module further including an outer radial flange (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) and a TOBI connection flange (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page);
wherein the annular combustor module (14) includes an inner radial wall structure (32), and the inner diffuser case and the inner radial wall structure (32) define a portion of a diffuser inner diameter (ID) gas flow path (56); and
wherein the turbine first vane assembly module, the annular combustor module (14), and the inner diffuser structure module are independent of one another and are coupled to one another at couplings (in this case, the coupling is a fastener as shown in annotated Fig. 1 below. Note that since the combustor is annular, there will be more than one fastener) disposed radially inside of the diffuser ID gas flow path (56) – (as shown in annotated Fig. 1, the fasteners are located beneath, or radially inside, diffuser ID gas flow path 56).
PNG
media_image4.png
600
873
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Blanchard does not teach that the inner diffuser structure module is a unitary inner diffuser structure module such that the compressor discharge, the inner diffuser case, and the TOBI are inseparably attached to one another, and further including the outer radial flange and the TOBI connection flange.
Prenter teaches (Fig. 2) a similar gas turbine engine (10 – Fig. 1) comprising:
a combustor section (20) having a unitary inner diffuser structure module (88), the unitary inner diffuser structure module (88) including a compressor discharge (see annotated Fig. 2 below), an inner diffuser case (84), and a TOBI (116) inseparably attached to one another (as shown by the shared cross-section of the annotated structures), the unitary inner diffuser structure module (88) further including an outer radial flange (see annotated Fig. 2 below) and a TOBI connection flange (see annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
671
941
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date to modify Blanchard by manufacturing the inner diffuser structure module to be a unitary inner diffuser structure module such that the compressor discharge, the inner diffuser case, and the TOBI are inseparably attached to one another, and further including the outer radial flange and a TOBI connection flange, as taught by Prenter, in order to simplify manufacturing, reduce the time to delivery to the customer, and lower the overall production costs of the unit (as evidenced by Binek, ¶ [0011]).
Furthermore, it has been held that “[T]he patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process”; In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985), MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 9, Blanchard, in view of Prenter and as evidenced by Binek, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 8, and Blanchard further teaches (Fig. 1) the inner diffuser case (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) and an aft compressor hub (see annotated Fig. 1 on next page) define a leakage gas flow path (62) disposed therebetween; and
wherein the couplings are disposed radially outside of the leakage gas flow path (62) – (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 on next page).
PNG
media_image3.png
592
855
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Blanchard, in view of Prenter and as evidenced by Binek, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 9, and Blanchard further teaches (Fig. 1) the couplings (see annotated Fig. 1 above) are disposed on an outer radial side of the TOBI (44) – (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 above, the couplings are disposed radially above TOBI 44).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the new limitations in claims 1 and 8 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. To the extent possible, Applicant's arguments have been addressed in the body of the rejections at the appropriate locations.
Examiner’s Comment
The Blanchard prior art as applied in the above rejection differs from Applicant’s invention in that Blanchard’s couplings (i.e., fasteners) go through the inlet (46) of Blanchard’s TOBI (44), whereas Applicant’s couplings are separate and axially offset (in the aft direction) from the inlet of Applicant’s TOBI.
Conclusion
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 HENRY NG whose telephone number is (571)272-2318. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:30 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, 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.
/HENRY NG/ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741 Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights