DETAILED ACTION
Status
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application papers filed on 6 September 2024.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim(s) 1-35 is/are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 25 October 2024, 31 October 2024, 14 August 2025, and 24 February 2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has/have been considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At paragraph 0034: “one or more of the fan blades 40 may rotatable relative to the disk 42” is suggested to be: one or more of the fan blades 40 may be rotatable relative to the disk 42. Appropriate correction is required.
(B) At paragraph 0036: “the disk 42 is covered by rotatable front hub 48 aerodynamically contoured to promote an airflow” is suggested to be: the disk 42 is covered by rotatable front hub 48 that is aerodynamically contoured to promote an airflow. Appropriate correction is required.
(C) At paragraphs 0085, 0087-0111, 0113-0129: the term “clauses” is suggested to be: embodiments. Appropriate correction is required.
(D) At paragraph 0087-0088: “wherein
M
t
i
p
,
c
(
R
L
)
” is suggested to be: wherein
M
t
i
p
,
c
(
R
L
)
. Appropriate correction is required.
The disclosure may have more informalities not identified above. Please review the specification for any further appropriate correction(s).
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 6 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 2: “ratio c/D” is suggested to be: a ratio c/D, wherein “c” is an average fan chord width and “D” is a fan diameter, is between. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 23 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 2: “ratio c/D” is suggested to be: a ratio c/D, wherein “c” is an average fan chord width and “D” is a fan diameter, is between. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11852161 to Yao et al.
Instant Application
Patent
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,cRL”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”),
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,cRL-0.97,
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+Δy2, and
wherein 0.0075 < Δy2< 1.5.
Claim 13. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,cRL”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”),
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,cRL-0.97,
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+Δy2, and
wherein 0.0 < Δy2< 1.5.
Claim 17. The turbomachine of claim 13, wherein Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075 and less than 1.5.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claim 1 falls entirely within the scope of patent claim 17. Claim 1 of the instant application requires 0.0075 < Δy2 that is identical to that of patent claim 17 except that the patent claim further requires Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075. Thus, it is apparent that the instant application claim 1 is anticipated by the more specific patent claim 17.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/813,586.
Instant Application
Copending Application
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”),
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,(RL)-0.97,
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2, and
wherein 0.0075 < Δy2< 1.5.
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing;
wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”);
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,cRL-0.97;
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2;
wherein 0 < Δy2< 1.5;
wherein HTR is within a range equal to or greater than 0.1 and equal to or less than 0.5;
wherein BC is within a range equal to or greater than 10 and equal to or less than 18;
wherein FPR is within a range equal to or greater than 1.2 and equal to or less than 1.5;
wherein Mtip,(RL) is within a range equal to or greater than 0.45 and equal to or less than 1.34; and
wherein Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075 and less than 1.5.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claim 1 falls entirely within the scope of copending claim 1. Claim 1 of the instant application requires 0.0075 < Δy2 that is identical to that of patent claim 1 except that the patent claim further requires at least Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075. Thus, it is apparent that the instant application claim 1 is anticipated by the more specific copending claim 1.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 5 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7 of copending application 18/813,586.
Instant Application
Copending Application
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”),
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,(RL)-0.97,
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2, and
wherein 0.0075 < Δy2< 1.5.
Claim 5. The turbomachine of claim 1, wherein the turbomachine has a gear ratio within a range equal to or greater than 3.2 and equal to or less than 5.0.
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing;
wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”);
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,cRL-0.97;
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2;
wherein 0 < Δy2< 1.5;
wherein HTR is within a range equal to or greater than 0.1 and equal to or less than 0.5;
wherein BC is within a range equal to or greater than 10 and equal to or less than 18;
wherein FPR is within a range equal to or greater than 1.2 and equal to or less than 1.5;
wherein Mtip,(RL) is within a range equal to or greater than 0.45 and equal to or less than 1.34; and
wherein Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075 and less than 1.5.
Claim 7. The turbomachine of claim 1, wherein the turbomachine has a gear ratio within a range equal to or greater than 3.2 and equal to or less than 5.0.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claim 5 falls entirely within the scope of copending claim 7. Claim 5 of the instant application requires 0.0075 < Δy2 that is identical to that of patent claim 7 except that the patent claim further requires at least Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075. Thus, it is apparent that the instant application claim 5 is anticipated by the more specific copending claim 7.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 6 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of copending application 18/813,586.
Instant Application
Copending Application
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”),
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,(RL)-0.97,
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2, and
wherein 0.0075 < Δy2< 1.5.
Claim 6. The turbomachine of claim 1, wherein the fan blade includes an airfoil portion made from a polymer matrix composite (PMC) material, a metallic leading edge, ratio c/D is between 0.16 and 0.21, and the fan has between 16 and 25 fan blades
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing;
wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”);
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,cRL-0.97;
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2;
wherein 0 < Δy2< 1.5;
wherein HTR is within a range equal to or greater than 0.1 and equal to or less than 0.5;
wherein BC is within a range equal to or greater than 10 and equal to or less than 18;
wherein FPR is within a range equal to or greater than 1.2 and equal to or less than 1.5;
wherein Mtip,(RL) is within a range equal to or greater than 0.45 and equal to or less than 1.34; and
wherein Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075 and less than 1.5.
Claim 8. The turbomachine of claim 1, wherein the fan blade includes an airfoil portion made from a polymer matrix composite (PMC) material, a metallic leading edge, ratio c/D is between 0.16 and 0.21, and the fan has between 16 and 25 fan blades.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claim 6 falls entirely within the scope of copending claim 8. Claim 6 of the instant application requires 0.0075 < Δy2 that is identical to that of patent claim 8 except that the patent claim further requires at least Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075. Thus, it is apparent that the instant application claim 6 is anticipated by the more specific copending claim 8.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 19 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of copending application 18/813,586.
Instant Application
Copending Application
Claim 1. A method of assembly, comprising: mounting a fan inside an annular casing for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”), wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,(RL)-0.97, wherein m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2, and wherein 0.0075 < Δy2< 1.5.
Claim 1. A method of assembly, comprising: mounting a fan inside an annular casing for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”); wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,(RL)-0.97; wherein m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2; wherein 0 < Δy2< 1.5;
wherein HTR is within a range equal to or greater than 0.1 and equal to or less than 0.5; wherein BC is within a range equal to or greater than 10 and equal to or less than 18; wherein FPR is within a range equal to or greater than 1.2 and equal to or less than 1.5;
wherein Mtip,(RL) is within a range equal to or greater than 0.45 and equal to or less than 1.34; and wherein Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075 and less than 1.5.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claim 19 falls entirely within the scope of copending claim 9. Claim 19 of the instant application requires 0.0075 < Δy2 that is identical to that of patent claim 9 except that the patent claim further requires at least Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075. Thus, it is apparent that the instant application claim 19 is anticipated by the more specific copending claim 9.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 23 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of copending application 18/813,586.
Instant Application
Copending Application
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing; wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”),
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,(RL)-0.97,
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,cRL-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2, and
wherein 0.0075 < Δy2< 1.5.
Claim 23. The turbomachine of claim 1, wherein the fan blade includes an airfoil portion made from a polymer matrix composite (PMC) material, a metallic leading edge, ratio c/D is between 0.16 and 0.21, and the fan has between 16 and 25 fan blades
Claim 1. A turbomachine comprising:
an annular casing; and
a fan disposed inside the annular casing and mounted for rotation about an axial centerline, the fan including fan blades that extend radially outwardly toward the annular casing;
wherein the fan includes a fan hub-to-tip ratio (“HTR”), a fan blade count (“BC”), a fan pressure ratio (“FPR”), and a redline corrected fan tip Mach number (“Mtip,(RL)”) according to a Second Performance Factor (“SPF”);
wherein SPF = π4(1-HTR2)/BC20FPR-10.4/Mtip,cRL-0.97;
wherein m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+1.5> SPF >m2⋅[Mtip,(RL)-1.1]+Δy2;
wherein 0 < Δy2< 1.5;
wherein HTR is within a range equal to or greater than 0.1 and equal to or less than 0.5;
wherein BC is within a range equal to or greater than 10 and equal to or less than 18;
wherein FPR is within a range equal to or greater than 1.2 and equal to or less than 1.5;
wherein Mtip,(RL) is within a range equal to or greater than 0.45 and equal to or less than 1.34; and
wherein Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075 and less than 1.5.
Claim 15. The turbomachine of claim 1, wherein the fan blade includes an airfoil portion made from a polymer matrix composite (PMC) material, a metallic leading edge, ratio c/D is between 0.16 and 0.21, and the fan has between 16 and 25 fan blades.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claim 23 falls entirely within the scope of copending claim 15. Claim 23 of the instant application requires 0.0075 < Δy2 that is identical to that of patent claim 15 except that the patent claim further requires at least Δy2 is equal to or greater than 0.0075. Thus, it is apparent that the instant application claim 23 is anticipated by the more specific copending claim 15.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Cited Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 10670040 to Nolcheff et al. teaches the number of blades is greater than or equal to 16 and less than or equal to 24, wherein there is a relationship between blade count and the nose member aspect ratio. EP 2535548 to Adams et al. teaches there has been a correlation between increased bypass area ratio and increased low pressure turbine section radius and low pressure turbine section airfoil count. As is discussed below, this correlation may be broken by having an engine with relatively high bypass area ratio and relatively low turbine size.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome, or with proper filing of a terminal disclaimer, the double patenting rejections set forth in this Office action.
Claim(s) 2-18 is/are allowed due to dependence from claim 1.
Claims(s) 20-35 is/are allowed due to dependence from claim 19.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
(A) Regarding Claim(s) 1 and 19:
PNG
media_image1.png
144
754
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1 and 19 is/are deemed novel and nonobvious over the cited art due to the inclusion of the limitation(s): SPF
which, in combination with the other requirements of the claim(s), is neither taught nor suggested by the cited prior art as a whole, either alone or in combination. Specifically, the cited art (e.g. US 7,374,403 to Decker and US 10,458,426 to Wilkin, II et al.) teaches fan design characteristics of blade number or blade chord in relation to solidity of the blade. Thus, the cited art does not disclose, teach or suggest the combination of variables required by the claims to result in the first performance characteristic.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLA M MCCAFFREY whose telephone number is (571)272-3438. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (excluding Wednesday) 10AM - 2 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 Courtney Heinle can be reached on 571-270-3508. 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.
KAYLA M. MCCAFFREY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/Kayla McCaffrey/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights