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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10 June 2024 and 22 October 2024 were considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
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 14 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 14 recites that forming the surface layer comprises at least one of vapor phase x-iding or pack cementation. It is unclear what is meant by “x-iding”. Vapor phase x-iding is not a commonly recognized term and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be apprised of the scope of the invention based on the wording of the claim. Examiner suggests including the definition of “x-iding” that is provided in paragraph [0016] of the instant specification in the language of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-10, 12-15, 17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US10895015 of Schaedler.
Claim 1 claims a method comprising: forming a component by way of electrodeposition of a metallic layer over an exposed surface of a sacrificial mandrel; removing the sacrificial mandrel; forming a surface layer of at least one alloying element on the metallic layer; and heat treating the component having the metallic layer and the surface layer of at least one alloying element.
Schaedler teaches thin-walled high temperature alloy structures via multi-material additive manufacturing in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Schaedler discloses a method for forming a thin-walled structure, the method including: forming a polymer template; forming a plurality of coating layers, each of the coating layers being formed on the polymer template or on a previously formed layer, the forming of the plurality of coating layers including: forming a first coating layer on the polymer template, the first coating layer including one or more chemical elements, including at least 1% by weight of a first metal chemical element; forming a second coating layer on the first coating layer, the second coating layer including one or more chemical elements, including at least 1% by weight of a second metal chemical element, different from the first metal chemical element; removing the polymer template; and performing a heat treatment of the plurality of coating layers, after removing the polymer template, Para[0026]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 1.
Claim 2 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the metallic layer is one of elemental nickel, cobalt, iron, or nickel-cobalt alloy.
Schaedler teaches that the article includes, as a major component, a substance selected from the group consisting of nickel, cobalt, iron, and combinations thereof, Para[0012]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 2.
Claim 3 further limits claim 2 by claiming that the at least one alloying element is selected from a group of: aluminum, silicon, tantalum, titanium, chromium, and boron.
Schaedler teaches a second coating layer including chromium or NiCr, Para[0012].
Schaedler also teaches Mo, W, Ta, Ti, and Re and Si, C, B, Zr, Hf, and Y, Para[0014], and a second coating layer including one or more chemical elements selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Fe, Cu, Cr, Zn, Sn, Pb, Cd, Ag, Au, Pd, Pt, Rh, Mn, and Ir. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 3.
Claim 6 further limits claim 3 by claiming that the at least one alloying element comprises multiple alloying elements selected from the group.
Schaedler teaches a second coating layer including chromium or NiCr, Para[0012].
Schaedler also teaches Mo, W, Ta, Ti, and Re and Si, C, B, Zr, Hf, and Y, Para[0014], and a second coating layer including one or more chemical elements selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Fe, Cu, Cr, Zn, Sn, Pb, Cd, Ag, Au, Pd, Pt, Rh, Mn, and Ir. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 6.
Claim 7 further limits claim 6 by forming a second surface layer of at least one other alloying element and another heat treating of the component.
Schaedler teaches that the part may be electroplated with 100 microns of nickel, the polymer template may be etched out with 2 molar sodium hydroxide solution, and a diffusion chromium coating may then be deposited on the hollow nickel part by pack cementation, resulting in approximately (about) 32 microns of effective chromium thickness. A diffusion aluminum coating may then be deposited on the hollow part by pack cementation, resulting in approximately (about) 31 microns of effective aluminum thickness. The part may then be heat treated at 1100° C. for 50 hours in argon to interdiffuse Ni, Cr and Al, and simple Inconel-type alloy may be formed. The alloy may then be aged at 900° C. for 12 hours to establish a gamma-gamma prime microstructure, Para[0147]. The diffusion aluminum coating is equivalent to the second surface layer and the aging heat treatment is the second heat treating of the component.
Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 7.
Claim 8 further limits claim 3 by claiming that the metallic layer is elemental nickel and the at least one alloying element is aluminum and wherein the heat-treating infiltrates the aluminum into the metallic layer and creates a strengthened precipitate of nickel-aluminide.
Schaedler teaches a diffusion aluminum coating, and that the part may then be heat treated at 1100° C. for 50 hours in argon to interdiffuse Ni, Cr and Al, Para[0147]. Schaedler also discloses that this alloy derives its strength from the precipitation of fine L12 Ni(Al, Cr) phases which inhibit dislocation motion at elevated temperatures, Para[0137]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 8.
Claim 9 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the heat treating comprises a first heat-treatment wherein the at least one alloying element infiltrates the metallic layer.
Schaedler teaches a diffusion aluminum coating, and that the part may then be heat treated at 1100° C. for 50 hours in argon to interdiffuse Ni, Cr and Al, Para[0147]. Schaedler also discloses that this alloy derives its strength from the precipitation of fine L12 Ni(Al, Cr) phases which inhibit dislocation motion at elevated temperatures, Para[0137]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 9.
Claim 10 further limits claim 9 by claiming that the heat treating comprises a second heat-treatment configured to form precipitates.
Schaedler discloses that once the coatings are built up to the desired thickness and composition, a homogenization heat treatment is utilized. This may then be followed by an ageing heat treatment to adjust the microstructure, Para[0127]. Schaedler also discloses that this alloy derives its strength from the precipitation of fine L12 Ni(Al, Cr) phases which inhibit dislocation motion at elevated temperatures, Para[0137]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 10.
Claim 12 further limits claim 9 by claiming that the first heat-treatment is further configured to homogenize a distribution of the at least one alloying element.
Schaedler discloses that once the coatings are built up to the desired thickness and composition, a homogenization heat treatment is utilized, Para[0127]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 12.
Claim 13 further limits claim 1 by forming a second surface layer of at least one other alloying element and another heat treating of the component.
Schaedler teaches that the part may be electroplated with 100 microns of nickel, the polymer template may be etched out with 2 molar sodium hydroxide solution, and a diffusion chromium coating may then be deposited on the hollow nickel part by pack cementation, resulting in approximately (about) 32 microns of effective chromium thickness. A diffusion aluminum coating may then be deposited on the hollow part by pack cementation, resulting in approximately (about) 31 microns of effective aluminum thickness. The part may then be heat treated at 1100° C. for 50 hours in argon to interdiffuse Ni, Cr and Al, and simple Inconel-type alloy may be formed. The alloy may then be aged at 900° C. for 12 hours to establish a gamma-gamma prime microstructure, Para[0147]. The diffusion aluminum coating is equivalent to the second surface layer and the aging heat treatment is the second heat treating of the component.
Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 13.
Claim 14 further limits claim 1 by claiming that forming the surface layer comprises at least one of vapor phase x-iding or pack cementation.
Schaedler teaches that a diffusion aluminum coating may then be deposited on the hollow part by pack cementation, Para[0147]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 14.
Claim 15 further limits claim 1 by welding the metallic layer prior to forming the surface layer.
Schaedler discloses utilizing an act selected from the group consisting of brazing, transient liquid bonding, welding, and adhesive bonding, Para[0021]. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 15.
Claim 17 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the component is a duct and wherein the surface layer is formed on an exterior surface and an interior surface of the duct.
The instant specification further describes the component as a duct assembly within a gas turbine engine, Para[0005].
Schaedler teaches that the disclosed alloy is used in gas turbines, [0137], and rocket engine chambers and nozzles, Para[0145]. One of ordinary skill in the art would consider the chambers taught by Schaedler as meeting the limitations of the claimed duct. Figure 22B of Schaedler also shows a duct component. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 17.
Claim 19 claims a component formed from the method of claim 1.
Schaedler teaches that the disclosed alloy is used in gas turbines, [0137], and rocket engine chambers and nozzles, Para[0145]. One of ordinary skill in the art would consider the gas turbines, chambers, and nozzles taught by Schaedler as meeting the limitations of the claimed component. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 19.
Claim 20 further limits claim 19 by claiming that the metallic layer is elemental nickel, cobalt, iron, or a nickel-cobalt, or a nickel-cobalt-phosphorous alloy and the at least one alloying element is selected from a group of: aluminum, silicon, tantalum, titanium, chromium, and boron.
Schaedler teaches that the article includes, as a major component, a substance selected from the group consisting of nickel, cobalt, iron, and combinations thereof, Para[0012]. Schaedler discloses a second coating layer including chromium or NiCr, Para[0012]. Schaedler also teaches Mo, W, Ta, Ti, and Re and Si, C, B, Zr, Hf, and Y, Para[0014], and a second coating layer including one or more chemical elements selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Fe, Cu, Cr, Zn, Sn, Pb, Cd, Ag, Au, Pd, Pt, Rh, Mn, and Ir. Thus, Schaedler anticipates all limitations of claim 20.
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 4, 5, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US10895015 of Schaedler.
Claim 4 further limits claim 3 by claiming that the metallic layer has a thickness of 25 micrometers to 5000 micrometers.
Schaedler teaches the ability to deposit dense and smooth metal coatings in the thickness range of 10 μm to 100 μm in a rapid and cost-efficient manner, Para[0119]. This range overlaps with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists, see MPEP 2144.05. Thus, Schaedler covers all limitations of claim 4.
Claim 5 further limits claim 4 by claiming that the surface layer has a thickness of 12.5 micrometers to 130 micrometers.
Schaedler teaches a 20 μm thick outer metal layer, Para[0123], and a diffusion aluminum coating with 31 microns of effective aluminum thickness, Para[0147]. These values overlap with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists, see MPEP 2144.05. Thus, Schaedler covers all limitations of claim 5.
Claim 16 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the heat treating is performed at a treatment temperature of 500 °C to 1200 °C.
Schaedler teaches heat treatment at 1100° C, Para[0140]. This value overlaps with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists, see MPEP 2144.05. Thus, Schaedler covers all limitations of claim 16.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US10895015 of Schaedler, as cited above, further in view of SIFI OUAHID ET AL, "The effect of the solution and aging treatments on the microstructures and microhardness of nickel-based superalloy," Applied Physics A (2020) 126: 345 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00339-020-03517-2 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 15 April 2020 (11 pages).
Claim 11 further limits claim 10 by claiming that the second heat-treatment is a multi-step aging process.
While Schaedler discloses aging heat treatment, a multi-step aging process is not taught.
Sifi teaches the effect of the solution and aging treatments on the microstructures and microhardness of nickel-based superalloy in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Sifi teaches that this solution treatment is followed by a two-stage aging treatment at low temperatures. In order to optimize the gamma prime parameters (volume fraction, composition, morphology, and their spatial distribution), we must achieve a controlled and fine-scale precipitation of γʹ Ni3(Al, Ti), Pg[2 of 11]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the multi-step aging treatment taught by Sifi in the method taught by Schaedler in order to optimize the gamma prime parameters and achieve a fine-scale precipitate. Thus, Schaedler in view of Sifi covers all limitations of claim 11.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US10895015 of Schaedler, as cited above, further in view of US2021402471 of Whalen.
Claim 18 further limits claim 17 by claiming that the duct is at least one of non-linear, non-circular, or includes a variable metallic layer thickness.
Schaedler teaches a chromium metal layer and an aluminum metal layer of different thicknesses, Para[0147]. Thus, Shaedler covers variable metallic layer thickness.
Additionally, Whalen discloses devices and methods for performing shear-assisted extrusion and extrusion processes in a similar field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Whalen teaches an alloy that could replace expensive super-alloys used in applications such as gas turbines, Para[0142]. One of ordinary skill in the art would consider the alloy disclosed in Whalen as compatible with the claimed invention as the instant specification describes the component as a duct assembly within a gas turbine engine, Para[0005]. Whalen also discloses that this arrangement enables the formation of items with noncircular hollow cross sections, Para[0129]. Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the method disclosed by Schaedler in a non-circular application as taught by Whalen since Whalen teaches that the disclosed alloy could replace the alloys used in gas turbines such as the one described in the instant specification. Thus, Schaedler in view of Whalen covers all limitations of claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB BENJAMIN STILES whose telephone number is (571)272-0598. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at (571) 272-1401. 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.
/Keith D. Hendricks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/JACOB BENJAMIN STILES/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights