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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/24/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
“herein the part further comprises an additional coating located on the outer region of the environmental barrier layer, said additional coating being a thermal barrier having a thickness greater than or equal to 100 µm, or a protective layer against calcium and magnesium aluminosilicates having a thickness greater than or equal to 50 µm” of claim 6
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-6 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “an inner region of barrier to oxidizing and corrosive species” in line 6-7. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “an inner region of barrier for oxidizing and corrosive species”.
Claim 1 recites “cracks” in line 10. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “the cracks” since it is previously recited in the claim.
Claim 2-6 and 8 recite “The part” in line 1. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “The coated part” since it is previously recited as such.
Claim 2 is missing a comma after “claim 1” in line 1.
Claim 2 recites “adjacent cracks” in line 2. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “the adjacent cracks” since it is previously recited in the claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “the thermomechanical adaptation crack network” in line 2. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “the network of thermomechanical adaptation cracks” since it is previously recited as such in claim 1.
Claim 3 recites “the thermomechanical adaptation crack network” in line 2. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “the network of thermomechanical adaptation cracks” since it is previously recited as such in claim 1.
Claim 3 recites “a depth” in line 2. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “the depth” since it is previously recited in the claim.
Claim 6 recites “the part” in line 2. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “the coated part” since it is previously recited as such.
Claim 8 recites “the inner region and outer region” in line 1-2. For clarity of the claim, it should be recited as “the inner region and the outer region” since it is previously recited as such in claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. US 12227464 in view of Namba et al. US 20090176059.
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses:
a substrate (Fig 2: 212) of composite material with a matrix at least partially of ceramic (Col 3, line 62-65), and
an environmental barrier (214) on the substrate and comprising: (i) a bond coat layer (216) comprising silicon present on a surface of the substrate (Col 8, line 35-38: bond coat includes silicon), and
(ii) an environmental barrier layer (218(18) and 220(20) and 222(22)) covering the bond coat layer (218 and 220 and 222 cover 216),
said environmental barrier layer comprising an inner region (218) of barrier to oxidizing and corrosive species which is not cracked and located on the bond coat layer side (Col 9, line 15-19), and
an outer region (222), opposite the bond coat layer and covering the inner region (222 covers 220 and is opposite of 216), having a network of thermomechanical adaptation cracks (223) having cracks extending over a depth comprised between 50% and 95% a thickness of said environmental barrier layer (223 extend over a depth that is over a thickness),
wherein the inner region and the outer region of the environmental barrier layer are made of the same material (Col 11, line 8-10: 218(418) is made of a lesser ytterbium disilicate; Col 5, line 21: 222 is made of ytterbium disilicate).
However, Li is silent as to:
a network of thermomechanical adaptation cracks having a distance between adjacent cracks comprised between 10 µm and 50 µm.
From the same field of endeavor, Namba teaches:
a network of thermomechanical adaptation cracks having a distance between adjacent cracks comprised between 10 µm and 50 µm (Par 181: pitch of the vertical cracks is 5% to 100% of the thickness of the layer 43; Thickness of layer 43 and 44 is between .1mm to 1mm; Layer 43 is between 10% and 90% of the thickness; therefore the overall possible thickness of layer 43 is .01mm to .9mm; then the pitch of the vertical cracks is between .0005mm to .9mm which converts to .5 µm to 900 µm, which would cover the range of the limitation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Li to have the pitch range for the crack spacing of Namba and the thickness of the coat to allow for the layer to have excellent spalling resistance (Par 167).
Regarding claim 2, Li as modified by Namba in the rejection of claim 1, where Li discloses:
wherein the distance between adjacent cracks of the thermomechanical adaptation crack network is comprised between 15 µm and 30 µm (Par 181: pitch of the vertical cracks is 5% to 100% of the thickness of the layer 43; Thickness of layer 43 and 44 is between .1mm to 1mm; Layer 43 is between 10% and 90% of the thickness; therefore the overall possible thickness of layer 43 is .01mm to .9mm; then the pitch of the vertical cracks is between .0005mm to .9mm which converts to .5 µm to 900 µm, which would cover the range of the limitation).
Regarding claim 3, Li as modified by Namba in the rejection of claim 1, where Li discloses:
wherein the cracks of the thermomechanical adaptation crack network extend over a depth comprised between 75% and 90% of the thickness of said environmental barrier layer (Fig 2: 223 extend over a depth that is over a thickness).
Regarding claim 4, Li as modified by Namba in the rejection of claim 1, where Li discloses:
wherein the environmental barrier layer comprises a silicate of at least one rare earth (Col 11, line 8-10: 218(418) is made of a lesser ytterbium disilicate; Col 5, line 21: 222 is made of ytterbium disilicate)..
Regarding claim 5, Li as modified by Namba in the rejection of claim 1, where Li discloses:
wherein the environmental barrier layer comprises yttrium disilicate, ytterbium disilicate, or a mixture of these two compounds (Col 11, line 8-10: 218(418) is made of a lesser ytterbium disilicate; Col 5, line 21: 222 is made of ytterbium disilicate)..
Regarding claim 8, Li as modified by Namba in the rejection of claim 1, where Li discloses:
wherein the inner region and outer region of the environmental barrier layer are in yttrium disilicate, ytterbium disilicate, or a mixture of these two compounds (Col 11, line 8-10: 218(418) is made of a lesser ytterbium disilicate; Col 5, line 21: 222 is made of ytterbium disilicate).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. US 12227464 and Namba et al. US 20090176059 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hazel et al. US 20060280952.
Regarding claim 6, Li as modified by Namba in the rejection of claim 1, where they are silent as to:
wherein the part further comprises an additional coating located on the outer region of the environmental barrier layer, said additional coating being a thermal barrier having a thickness greater than or equal to 100 µm, or a protective layer against calcium and magnesium aluminosilicates having a thickness greater than or equal to 50 µm.
From the same field of endeavor, Hazel teaches:
wherein the part further comprises an additional coating located on the outer region of the environmental barrier layer, said additional coating being a thermal barrier having a thickness greater than or equal to 100 µm (Fig 2; Par 50: 74 is a TBC on top of the outer layer that between 25 to 769 microns/ micro meters).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Li’s outer layer to have a TBC on the outer layer as taught by Hazel to provides thermal insulating properties (Par 50).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wallace et al. US 12686816, Chen et al. US 20210331983, Sansom US 20120276355, Helmick et al. US 20100028711, Nagaraj et al. US 7291403, and Okajima et al. US 20200048751 discloses an outer layer with crack similar to applicants. Yamaguchi et al. US 20190092702 discloses similar materials as applicants. Burns et al. US 20040081760 discloses multilayers with gaps similar to applicant.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrew J Marien whose telephone number is (469)295-9159. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am- 6:00 pm CST, Monday through Friday.
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 at (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.
/Andrew J Marien/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights