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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II in the reply filed on 24 April 2024 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 24 April 2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 14, 16-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abdallah (US 20070154304) in view of Pelton (US 20190170155).
Regarding claim 1, Abdallah teaches A single shaft, one piece rotor comprising: a hub (Figure 4, item 31. Various other embodiments meet these limitations and will be pointed to in the specific dependent claims they apply to. Each of these will also meet the limitations of the claims they are dependent from, figure 4 is pointed to for simplicity) that extends from a hub aft end to a hub forward end (Figure 4 shows an aft end on the right side and a forward end on the left side), wherein the hub aft end defines a first diameter and the hub forward end defines a second diameter that is smaller than the first diameter (Figure 4 shows the aft end having a larger diameter than the tip central point of the impeller hub at the forward end); a plurality of blade stages extending from a forward end to an aft end (Figure 4 shows blade stages 40a, 40b, and 40c that all extend from a forward end at the hub forward tip toa an aft end at the downstream end of each stage), wherein the blade stages are stacked, one on top of the other, radially outwardly from the hub (Figure 4 shows the stages 40a, 40b, and 40c all being radially stacked outwardly from the hub), including an inner stage (Figure 4, item 40a) and an outer stage that is radially spaced apart from the hub (Figure 4, either 40b or 40c); and a shroud between adjacent ones of the blade stages (Figure 4 shows shrouds 36 and 50 that are located between the first and second stages 40a and 40b and second and third stages 40b and 40c). However, Abdallah does not explicitly disclose that the inner stage is integral with the hub.
Abdallah and Pelton are analogous prior art because both describe multi-stage compressors with the blade stages stacked radially outwardly from the hub. Pelton teaches the forming the inner blades, the shroud, and the outer blades integrally with the hub (Pars. 0033, 0041, and 0051). Forming blades integrally with the hub is known to provide a stronger connection between the various parts as it prevents seams or fasteners. Abdallah shows the various blades and shrouds being connected to each other but does not describe how the structures are formed or connected so one of ordinary skill in the art would have to choose a suitable way to form and connect the blades and shrouds. As both Abdallah and Pelton show similar stacked compressor stage arrangements, the integral formation of the blades and shrouds with the hub of Pelton would provide predictable results in the multiple stages of Abdallah. Thereby, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to integrally form the blades, shrouds, and hub of Abdallah as described in Pelton because forming blades integrally with the hub is known to provide a stronger connection between the various parts as it prevents seams or fasteners and combining prior art elements according to known methods is obvious with predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 2, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches that the rotor is additively manufactured. This is a product by process limitation and as such is only limited by the structure that the process imparts on the apparatus. There is no clear structure imparted by additive manufacturing that is not provided by another method of manufacturing like forging and as such the limitations are taught. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 3, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches a plurality of the shrouds (Abdallah Figure 4, items 36 and 50), wherein each one of the blade stages is surrounded by a corresponding one of the shrouds (Figure 4 shows items 40a and 40b surrounded by a shroud), such that there is at least an inner shroud surrounding the inner stage (Figure 4, item 36), and an outer shroud surrounding the outer stage (Figure 4, item 50).
Regarding claim 4, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches that the hub and shrouds are each bell shaped (Abdallah Figure 4 shows the hub 31 and shrouds 36 and 50 all being bell shaped).
Regarding claim 5, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches that each of the blade stages defines a flow path having a flow area that increases towards the forward end of the hub. Abdallah Figure 4 shows the flow path area for each stage 40a-c being larger at the inlet at the forward end of the hub than the outlet at the aft end. As such, the flow are increases as you get towards the forward end.
Regarding claim 6, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches that each of the shrouds extends from an aft end to a forward end (Abdallah Figure 4, items 36 and 50); the aft end of the inner shroud is axially forward of the hub aft end (Figure 4 shows the aft end of the inner shroud 36 shown at the bottom and top ends of the figure being axially forward of the hub at the same radial point); and the aft end of each successively exterior one of the shrouds is axially forward of the adjacent one of the shrouds (Figure 4 shows 50 axially forward of 36 at the same radial point), whereby a flow path along each of the blade stages is radial at the aft end of the hub (Figure 4 at the outlet shown by the flow arrows) and axial at the forward and of the hub (Figure 4 at the inlet shown by the flow areas 52).
Regarding claim 7, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches that the hub defines an axial center channel for rotationally securing the hub to a housing (Abdallah Figure 4 where the hub secures to the shaft or where item 24 forms a channel).
Regarding claim 14, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches the rotor of claim 1, wherein the rotor is a three-stage rotor having: the inner stage that extends from an inner stage forward end to an inner stage aft end (Abdallah Figure 4, item 40a), the outer stage that extends from an outer stage forward end to an outer stage aft end (Figure 4, item 40c), and an intermediate stage that extends from an intermediate stage forward end to an intermediate stage aft end (Figure 4, item 40b); and the shroud is an inner shroud surrounding the inner stage (Figure 4, item 36), and an intermediate shroud surrounds the intermediate stage (Figure 4, item 50); and wherein the assembly includes: a housing in which the rotor is encased (Figure 4, items 20 and 26), wherein the housing extends from a forward end to an aft end (Figure 4 shows aft and forward ends of the housing), wherein: the forward end defines a forward inner nozzle and a forward inner passage that abut the forward end of the inner stage (Figure 4, item 30), a forward outer nozzle and a forward outer passage that abut the forward end of the outer stage (Figure 4 with the passage at the inlet of 40c defined by the flowpath beginning at the outlet of 40b), and a forward intermediate nozzle and a forward intermediate passage that abut the forward end of the intermediate stage (Figure 4, the flowpath between 40a and 40b with the inlet to 40b); and the aft end defines an aft inner nozzle and an aft inner passage that abut the aft end of the inner stage, an aft outer nozzle and an aft outer passage that abut the aft end of the outer stage, and an aft intermediate nozzle and an aft intermediate passage that abut the aft end of the intermediate stage (Figure 4 shows aft nozzles and passages for each of them defined by the passages from the outlets of 40a, b, and c).
Regarding claim 16, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches that the housing is additively manufactured (This is a product by process limitation and as such is only limited by the structure that the process imparts on the apparatus. There is no clear structure imparted by additive manufacturing that is not provided by another method of manufacturing like forging and as such the limitations are taught. See MPEP 2113), and the passages are positioned against the housing to define a close-packed shape (Abdallah Figure 4 shows the passages being closely packed).
Regarding claim 17, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches that each of the passages of the housing defines an annulus and the passages are layered against the housing or each other to define a close-packed shape (Abdallah Figure 4 shows each of the passages forming its own annulus and that they are closely packed).
Regarding claim 20, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches the limitations of claim 1 as set forth in the above 103 rejection and that the rotor is a three stage rotor that includes the inner and outer stages and an intermediate stage (Figure 4 items 40a-c and Figure 11, items 284a-c). However, the current combination does not explicitly teach that the inner stage is the compressor stage and the intermediate and outer stages are the turbine stages; or the inner and outer stages are the turbine stages and the intermediate stage is the compressor stage; or the inner and intermediate stages are the turbine stages and the outer stage is the compressor stage.
Abdallah teaches that the stacked rotor can include a combination of compressor and turbine stages on the same rotor (Figure 11) and further describes that “although FIG. 10 illustrates fluid transfer controller 270 having only one set of rotor blades configured to function as a compressor and only one set rotor blades configured to function as a turbine, fluid transfer controller 270 may include multiple sets of rotor blades for either one or both of such functions” (Par. 0103). Thereby, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the rotor section arrangements of Figures 10 and 11 such that a desired combination of turbine and compressor stages in a desired arrangement could be provided. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the three-stage rotor structure of Figure 11 to have the two aft stages 284a and 284b be turbine stages and the forward stage 284c be a compressor section in order to provide a desired output, compression rate, and power for the system for a system that desires two turbine sections and a compressor section. This embodiment of Abdallah in view of Pelton would provide the inner and intermediate stages as turbine stages and the outer stage as the compression stage.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abdallah (US 20070154304) in view of Pelton (US 20190170155) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Liu (US 20170306981).
Regarding claim 15, Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches the limitations of claim 14 above and the forward housing portion covers the forward end of the outer stage, and extends axially forward of the inner stage to define the forward inner nozzle, the forward inner passage, the forward outer nozzle, the forward outer passage, the forward intermediate nozzle, and the forward intermediate passage (see rejection of claim 14 above that describes the forward housing portions and forward nozzles); and the aft housing portion covers the aft end of each of the blade stages and the aft end of the hub and defines the aft inner nozzle, the aft inner passage, the aft outer nozzle, the aft outer passage, the aft intermediate nozzle, and the aft intermediate passage (see rejection of claim 14 above that describes the aft housing and aft structures). However, Abdallah in view of Pelton does not explicitly disclose that the first and second housing portions are unitary.
Abdallah in view of Pelton and Liu are analogous prior art because both describe compressor structures. Liu teaches integrally casting various housing structures together in order to enhance the overall strength of the structure and reduce the mounting difficulty (Par. 0035). Abdallah shows the various housing sections being connected to each other but does not describe how the structures are formed or connected so one of ordinary skill in the art would have to choose a suitable way to form and connect the housing structures. As both Abdallah in view of Pelton and Liu show compressor arrangements with housings, the integral formation of the housing sections would provide predictable results in the housing of Abdallah in view of Pelton. Thereby, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to integrally form various parts of the housing sections into an integral forward housing and an integral aft housing of Abdallah in view of Pelton as described in Liu because forming housing integrally is known to enhance the overall strength of the structure and reduce the mounting difficulty (Par. 0035) and combining prior art elements according to known methods is obvious with predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abdallah (US 20070154304) in view of Pelton (US 20190170155) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Colson (US 20210278107).
Regarding claim 18, the current combination of Abdallah in view of Pelton teaches the limitations of claim 14 as set forth in the above 103 rejection but does not explicitly teach An air cycle machine including: the rotor assembly of claim 14; an air conduit; primary and secondary heat exchangers coupled to the air conduit, wherein: the primary heat exchanger has an outlet coupled to the forward outer nozzle of the outer stage of the rotor assembly; and the secondary heat exchanger has: an inlet coupled to the aft outer nozzle of the outer stage of the rotor assembly; and an outlet coupled to the aft intermediate nozzle of the intermediate stage of the rotor assembly, wherein the forward intermediate nozzle for the intermediate stage of the rotor assembly is coupled to the aft inner nozzle of the inner stage of the rotor assembly, whereby the outer stage is a compressor stage and the intermediate and inner stages are turbine stages.
Abdallah teaches that the stacked rotor can include a combination of compressor and turbine stages on the same rotor (Figure 11) and further describes that “although FIG. 10 illustrates fluid transfer controller 270 having only one set of rotor blades configured to function as a compressor and only one set rotor blades configured to function as a turbine, fluid transfer controller 270 may include multiple sets of rotor blades for either one or both of such functions” (Par. 0103). Thereby, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the rotor section arrangements of Figures 10 and 11 such that a desired combination of turbine and compressor stages in a desired arrangement could be provided. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the three-stage rotor structure of Figure 11 to have the two aft stages 284a and 284b be turbine stages and the forward stage 284c be a compressor section in order to provide a desired output, compression rate, and power for the system for a system that desires two turbine sections and a compressor section. This embodiment of Abdallah in view of Pelton would provide the inner and intermediate stages as turbine stages and the outer stage as the compression stage.
However, Abdallah in view of Pelton does not explicitly teach An air cycle machine including: the rotor assembly of claim 14; an air conduit; primary and secondary heat exchangers coupled to the air conduit, wherein: the primary heat exchanger has an outlet coupled to the forward outer nozzle of the outer stage of the rotor assembly; and the secondary heat exchanger has: an inlet coupled to the aft outer nozzle of the outer stage of the rotor assembly; and an outlet coupled to the aft intermediate nozzle of the intermediate stage of the rotor assembly, wherein the forward intermediate nozzle for the intermediate stage of the rotor assembly is coupled to the aft inner nozzle of the inner stage of the rotor assembly.
Abdallah in view of Pelton and Colson are analogous prior art because both use a combination of compressor and turbine sections. Colson teaches an air cycle machine (Par. 0032) with an air conduit (Figure 2 shows a conduit defined by the flow path lines); primary and secondary heat exchangers coupled to the air conduit (Figure 2, items 112 and 114), wherein: the primary heat exchanger has an outlet coupled to the forward outer nozzle of the outer stage of the rotor assembly (Figure 2 shows 112 being coupled to a compressor 116); and the secondary heat exchanger has: an inlet coupled to the aft outer nozzle of the outer stage of the rotor assembly (Figure 2 shows 114 receiving fluid from the outlet of the compressor and being coupled to the turbine 118); and an outlet coupled to the aft intermediate nozzle of the intermediate stage of the rotor assembly, wherein the forward intermediate nozzle for the intermediate stage of the rotor assembly is coupled to the aft inner nozzle of the inner stage of the rotor assembly (Figure 2 shows the outlet of 118 and the inlet of 120 being coupled). As the combination of Abdallah in view of Pelton already describes a component with a single compressor section and two turbine sections and Colson requires an ACM that uses a single compressor and two turbines, the rotary machine of Abdallah in view of Pelton would provide predictable results in the ACM of Colson. Further, while Abdallah in view of Pelton shows a very variable system but does not explicitly describe the larger implementation within a machine system so one of ordinary skill in the art would have to choose a suitable system to implement it in.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the rotary machine of Abdallah in view of Pelton in the ACM of Colson because a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but or ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). Further, combining prior art elements according to known methods is obvious with predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). As providing the second turbine as the inner stage and the first turbine as the intermediate stage is one of a finite number of solutions known to be useful for implementation in a larger machine and Abdallah describes that the stages can be modified to fit the desired implementation (see rejection above), the intermediate stage would be upstream of the inner stage.
Regarding claim 19, Abdallah in view of Pelton and further in view of Colson teaches a fan disposed in the air conduit, downstream of the primary and secondary heat exchangers, wherein the forward end of the hub is connected to the fan via a shaft (Colson Figure 2, item 122).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE C RIBADENEYRA whose telephone number is (469)295-9164. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00 (CT).
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, Nathan Wiehe can be reached at (571)-272-8648. 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.
/THEODORE C RIBADENEYRA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights