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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 03/07/2026 has been fully considered and made of record. As such, the objection to claims 26-27 and rejection of claims 15-16 and 23-27 under 112(a) and (b), as outlined in the Final office action mailed 02/17/2026, have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 12-14, 17-19, 22-26 and 28-29 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 12, line 10, the limitation of “the defecting component” should be amended to - - the defective component - -.
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.
Claim(s) 12-14, 17-19, 21, 24-25 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto (JP 2004145496 A) in view of Scipio et al. (US 9,759,131, hereinafter “Scipio”).
As applied to claims 12 and 29, Goto teaches a method for carrying out servicing measures on an energy conversion installation, wherein the energy conversion installation comprises at least one machine comprising at least one gas turbine; at least one generator; and at least one steam turbine (abstract, col. [0020], Fig. 4); the method comprising:
carrying out repairs on the at least one machine, wherein a defective component of the at least one machine is replaced by a new, identical component or is repaired (paragraphs [0018], [0026], [0028], [0031]);
wherein, while carrying out the repairs, carrying out at least one of measures for extending a service life of the at least one machine or carrying out measures for optimizing the at least one machine (paragraphs [0005], [0018], [0026], [0027], [0028], [0032], [0030], see paragraph [0041] for “life diagnosis,” see paragraph [0044] wherein “it is not always necessary to provide the damage information and remaining life information in step s9 and step s12 to the gas turbine operator”); and
wherein the defective component is selected from the group consisting of a bearing of a rotor, a burner, a burner component, a compressor blade, a coating of the compressor blade, a compressor housing, a gas turbine housing, a blade carrier, a heat shield, a combustion chamber brick, a seal, a transition from a combustion chamber brick to turbine vane, fuel-supplying lines, a cooling aspect, and a monitoring apparatus (abstract, paragraphs [0001] and [0020], see equipment being power generation equipment, Fig. 4).
Goto teaches the service intervals can be revised but does not explicitly teach wherein the servicing measures are effective to permit skipping of a next service interval (as in claim 12) and skipping of two next service intervals (as in claim 29).
Scipio teaches a gas turbine system and a method for carrying out servicing and repair measures (paragraph bridging cols. 2-3) wherein the servicing measures are effective to permit reducing the number and/or duration of shut-downs for maintenance and/or repairs and increases the duration of time between shut-downs for maintenance and/or repairs and increasing the efficiency of the system (col. 11, lines 25-33). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ servicing measures into the method of Goto to allow skipping of any desired number of future service intervals, as taught by Scipio, as an effective means of prolonging the operational life of the system while limiting the number of costly down-times for maintenance and repairs.
As applied to claims 13 and 14, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including Goto further teaches wherein the defective component comprises a burner, a burner component, a compressor blade, a coating of the compressor blade, or a combustion chamber brick (see combustor 3 in paragraph [0020] which necessarily includes a burner).
As applied to claims 17-19, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including Goto further teaches that the parameters to be optimized are optimal inspection interval and optimal maintenance limit (paragraphs [0026]-[0027]) and that service life (life diagnosis, paragraph [0041], Fig. 8) and remaining life is calculated from the operation plan information provided by the operator (paragraph [0044]). As such, depending on the damaged and defect inflicted on the component, the operator can decide which measures (i.e., extending service life and/or optimizing the machine) and how many different measures need to be performed while carrying out the repairs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ in the method of Goto/Scipio, the steps of carrying one or multiple measures for extending the service life of respective defective component and measures for optimizing the machine including increase the efficiency and improved cooling depending on the extent of the damage and defect inflicted on the components and depending on specific design requirements which would result in an energy conversion installation being at enhanced efficiency and reduced down time which would result in a significant savings of repair and maintenance costs.
As applied to claim 21, Goto teaches a method for carrying out servicing measures on an energy conversion installation, wherein the energy conversion installation comprises at least one machine comprising at least one gas turbine; at least one generator; and at least one steam turbine (abstract, col. [0020], Fig. 4); the method comprising:
carrying out repairs on the at least one machine, wherein a defective component of the at least one machine is replaced by a new, identical component or is repaired (paragraphs [0018], [0026], [0028], [0031]);
wherein, while carrying out the repairs, carrying out measures for extending a service life of the at least one machine or carrying out measures for optimizing the at least one machine (paragraphs [0005], [0018], [0026], [0027], [0028], [0032], [0030], see paragraph [0041] for “life diagnosis,” see paragraph [0044] wherein “it is not always necessary to provide the damage information and remaining life information in step s9 and step s12 to the gas turbine operator”); and
wherein the defecting component is selected from the group consisting of a bearing of a rotor, a burner, a burner component, a compressor blade, a coating of the compressor blade, a compressor housing, a gas turbine housing, a blade carrier, a heat shield, a combustion chamber brick, a seal, a transition from a combustion chamber brick to a turbine vane, fuel-supplying lines, a cooling aspect, and a monitoring apparatus (abstract, paragraphs [0001] and [0020], see equipment being power generation equipment, Fig. 4).
In addition, depending on the damaged and defect inflicted on the component, the operator can decide which measures (i.e., extending service life and/or optimizing the machine) and how many different measures need to be performed while carrying out the repairs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ in the method of Goto, the steps of carrying one or two or multiple measures for extending the service life of respective defective component and one or two or multiple measures for optimizing the machine including increase the efficiency and improved cooling depending on the extent of the damage and defect inflicted on the components and depending on specific design requirements which would result in an energy conversion installation being at enhanced efficiency and reduced down time which would result in a significant savings of repair and maintenance costs.
Goto teaches the service intervals can be revised but does not explicitly teach wherein the servicing measures are effective to permit skipping of a next service interval.
Scipio teaches a gas turbine system and a method for carrying out servicing and repair measures (paragraph bridging cols. 2-3) wherein the servicing measures are effective to permit reducing the number and/or duration of shut-downs for maintenance and/or repairs and increases the duration of time between shut-downs for maintenance and/or repairs and increasing the efficiency of the system (col. 11, lines 25-33). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ servicing measures into the method of Goto to allow skipping of any desired number of future service intervals, as taught by Scipio, as an effective means of prolonging the operational life of the system while limiting the number of costly down-times for maintenance and repairs.
As applied to claim 24, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including Goto further teaches a power generation plant wherein the defective component is a compressor which necessarily includes a blade that needs to be repaired or replaced (see compressor 2 in paragraph [0020]) but does not explicitly teach replacing blades of the compressor with directionally solidified structure in the form of a columnar solidified microstructure.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select a directionally solidified compressor blade with columnar solidified microstructure to replace the blade of the compressor of Goto/Scipio considering the advantages directionally solidified blades with columnar solidified microstructure has over not-solidified blades such as improved ductility, enhanced strength, higher operating temperature and higher thermal fatigue capability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ directionally solidified blade with columnar solidified microstructure for the compressor blade of Goto/Scipio in order to improve the strength and longevity of the compressor blades under the high-load, high-temperature operating environment.
As applied to claim 25, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including Goto further teaches a power generation plant wherein the defective component is a combustor which necessarily includes a combustion chamber brick that needs to be repaired or replaced (see combustor 3 in paragraph [0020]) but does not explicitly teach replacing bricks that does not generate spoiler effect with bricks that are configured to generate spoiler effect.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select a combustor chamber brick that generates spoiler effect to replace the combustor chamber brick of Goto/Scipio that doesn’t generate any spoiler effect considering the advantages directionally solidified has over not-solidified blades such as improved ductility, enhanced strength, higher operating temperature and higher thermal fatigue capability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ a combustor chamber brick that generates spoiler effect for the combustor chamber brick of Goto/Scipio that doesn’t generate any spoiler effect in order to significantly improve the performance and efficiency of the combustion process considering the role that brick with spoiler effect has in altering the flow field distribution and pre-reaction distribution within the combustion chamber, thus affecting the flame propagation speed and reaction severity.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto (JP 2004145496 A) in view of Scipio et al. (US 9,759,131, hereinafter “Scipio”) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Furman et al. (US 8,328,506, hereinafter “Furman”).
As applied to claim 22, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including a power generation plant wherein the defective component is a turbine or compressor which naturally includes a rotor and a rotor bearing but does not explicitly teach replacing defective bearing with a new bearing that is at least 5% longer than the defective bearing.
Furman teaches an optimized turbocharger bearing system wherein in certain embodiments teaches increasing the effective length of compressor end bearing 56 in order to increase stability to make up for decrease of stability of rotor system at high speed (col. 4, last full paragraph). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to increase the rotor bearing of the compressor of Goto/Scipio, as taught by Furman, as an effective means of reducing the imbalance loads in the compressor bearing caused by imbalance in the rotor assembly (see Furman, col. 4, lines 59-62).
As for the claimed “at least 5% longer” for the increase in length, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select at least 5% longer for the length of the replacement bearing since Applicant has not disclosed that only 5% or more provide any advantage, is used for any particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. As such, it seems that one of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected applicant's invention to perform equally well with any other bearing length increase such as one taught by Goto/Scipio/Furman or the claimed range because either one performs the same function of repairing the gas turbine of the energy conversion machine with improved bearing to withstand the high-load, high-temperature operating environment for efficient running of the machine. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ in the method of Goto/Scipio a rotor bearing with at least 5% longer than the replaced bearing, as an effective means of improving any imbalance in the rotor assembly resulting in running a more efficient and machine.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto (JP 2004145496 A) in view of Scipio et al. (US 9,759,131, hereinafter “Scipio”) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Sayles (US 1,988,217).
As applied to claim 23, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including Goto teaches a power generation plant wherein the defective component is a combustor which necessarily includes a burner that need to be repaired or replaced (see combustor 3 in paragraph [0020] of Goto) but does not explicitly teach replacing the fuel-supplying lines with fuel-supplying lines that are calorized on an inside thereof.
Sayles teaches that is well-known to use calorized coating on the inside of burner pipes (considered as fuel lines) to impart high resistance to oxidation and corrosion (specification, page 6, lines 49-64). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to replace the fuel-supply lines of Goto/Scipio with fuel supply piping having calorized treatment on the inside, as taught by Sayles, as an effective means of improving the corrosion and oxidation resistance of the piping subjected during the operation of the machine.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto (JP 2004145496 A) in view of Scipio et al. (US 9,759,131, hereinafter “Scipio”) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view Sarv (WO 0061992 A1).
As applied to claim 26, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including Goto teaches a power generation plant wherein the defective component is a combustor 3 which necessarily includes a burner with a swirler that need to be repaired or replaced (see combustor 3 in paragraph [0020]) but does not explicitly teach replacing existing swirler vanes of the defective burner with installing new swirler vanes, wherein new swirler vanes comprise a smaller opening angle compared to the existing swirler vanes of the defective burner.
Sarv teaches a new and useful burner swirler that is used to reduce nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide that fuel burning power plants emit (page 1, line 4-5, 10-11). Sarv teaches different configurations and orientations of the tunnels 34 are possible and which can be used to transport any gaseous substance 40 to the openings 32 in a manner consistent with this invention. The size, shape, angle, number and orientation of the openings 32, as well as the size, shape, angle, number, and orientation of the swirl blades 30 can be varied to further improve NOx reduction, fuel ignition, and flame stability in the furnace when a burner is provided with the swirler 10 of the present invention. The present invention can be used with both staged (substoichiometric) and unstaged (stoichiometric or above) combustion. Significantly, the present invention can be employed in retrofit applications to existing burners, as well as in new burner constructions (page 6, lines 16-25, Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time invention was filed to replace the burner swirler of Goto/Scipio to have smaller opening angle compared to the defective existing swirler, as taught by Sarv, as an effective means of improving NOx reduction and fuel ignition.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto (JP 2004145496 A) in view of Scipio et al. (US 9,759,131, hereinafter “Scipio”) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view Patry et al. (US 20180038284A1).
As applied to claim 28, Goto as modified by Scipio teaches the invention cited including Goto teaches the power generation facility including gas turbine engine, a compressor, a combustor, a turbine, a steam turbine, a generator a condenser and other auxiliary equipment to monitor the state of each equipment (paragraphs [0020]-[0024]). Goto further teaches wherein the defective component could be any portion of the facility including the combustion chamber and burners. As such, Goto teaches the monitoring system monitors the combustor and thus, the combustion dynamic and combustion accelerations of the combustion chamber and burners. However, Goto/Scipio does not explicitly teach the defective component is the monitoring system and that the repair comprises retrofitting the system for monitoring to reduce or avoid combustion instabilities.
Patry teaches a system and a method for detecting condition of a gas turbine engine wherein a monitoring system is retrofitted to provide detection of additional components of the system (paragraph [0046] and [0063]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ in the repair of Goto/Scipio a step of retrofitting of the monitoring system, as taught by Patry, as an effective means of detecting any additional components (i.e., reducing or avoiding combustion instabilities) without any significant redesign of existing combustion chamber to install additional monitoring modules which results in significant cost savings.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references used in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARANG AFZALI whose telephone number is (571)272-8412. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am - 4 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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/SARANG AFZALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726 06/27/2026
Prosecution Insights