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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The current presentation of the claim 1 as amended include indefinite claim verbiage. In particular, the claim verbiage “wherein the ply drop lines include at least one first ply drop line comprising a terminal portion which extends from the blade tip to 90% of a height of the blade, including at least one reinforced first ply drop line the terminal portion thereof extends overall in an extension direction forming an angle between 5° and 85° with a local tangent to the warp strands” is indefinite. It is unclear if “the ply drop lines” include both at least one first ply drop lines and “at least one reinforced first ply drop line”. The claim verbiage “including at least one reinforced first ply drop line the terminal portion thereof extends” is also unclear since the terminal portion is previously disclosed as a terminal portion of the at least one first ply drop line; however, it appears the aforementioned “terminal portion thereof” is referring to “at least one reinforced first ply drop line”. The Examiner recommends clarifying the claim verbiage.
Regarding the Applicant’s position that the ply drop lines include at least one first ply drop line comprising a terminal portion which extends from the blade tip to 90% of a height of the blade and the terminal portion extending n an extension direction forming an angle between 5° and 85° with a local tangent to the warp strands is not disclosed by Alexander et al. (US 20110176927, hereinafter: “Alexander”) is considered by the Examiner. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Examiner has examined the claims as best understood as the claims contain indefinite claim verbiage. Alexander has considered the integrity of the airfoil in the event of operational loads and foreign object strikes (“High interlaminar shear stresses, such as from operational loads and foreign object strikes, in a laminated composite can cause delamination that compromises the structural integrity of the structure. The ply drops in composite blade 32 are staggered and spread apart to prevent crack/delamination propagation. In one example, the ply drops in composite blade 32 are arranged to have a 20:1 minimum ratio of ply drop distance to ply thickness,” [0015]). Alexander further discloses that the ply drop lines can occur at various locations along the preform 52 [0031-0032]. Alexander discloses a selected fiber can be terminated at a specific length of weaving providing a ply drop and terminal end [0033].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend the terminal portion of the at least one drop line from the blade tip to 90% of a height of the blade as claimed since stress loads and foreign object impacts are considered in the design of the airfoil and the composite reinforcement of the airfoil.
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.
Claims 1-15 are 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.
In Claim 1, the claim verbiage “wherein the ply drop lines include at least one first ply drop line comprising a terminal portion which extends from the blade tip to 90% of a height of the blade, including at least one reinforced first ply drop line the terminal portion thereof extends overall in an extension direction forming an angle between 5° and 85° with a local tangent to the warp strands” is indefinite. It is unclear if “the ply drop lines” include both at least one first ply drop lines and “at least one reinforced first ply drop line”. The claim verbiage “including at least one reinforced first ply drop line the terminal portion thereof extends” is also unclear since the terminal portion is previously disclosed as a terminal portion of the at least one first ply drop line; however, it appears the aforementioned “terminal portion thereof” is referring to “at least one reinforced first ply drop line”. The Examiner recommends clarifying the claim verbiage.
Claims 2-15 are rejected as being dependent on Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-5, and 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexander et al. (US 20110176927, hereinafter: “Alexander”).
In reference to Claim 1
Examiner’s Note: Claim 1 includes indefinite claim verbiage as presented in the 112b Rejection section above. The claim has been examined as best understood.
Alexander discloses:
A turbomachine fan blade (12, 32) comprising a root (46) configured to be attached to a fan disc (fan disc shown attached to fan blade 32 in Fig. 1) and an aerofoil (32) able to extend in an air flow and defining a blade tip (44) opposite the root (46), the blade having a pressure side (38), a suction side (40), a leading edge (34) and a trailing edge (36), the blade being elongated in a longitudinal direction (48) going from the root to the blade tip, said longitudinal direction being substantially orthogonal to a chord direction (chord direction shown in Fig. 3a) going from the leading edge (36) to the trailing edge (34), the blade being composed at least in part of a structure (50, 52, Fig. 3a) made of composite material comprising a fibrous reinforcement (50, 52) obtained by three-dimensional weaving [0017] and a matrix (resin, [0012], Fig. 4-5) in which the fibrous reinforcement (50) is embedded, the fibrous reinforcement comprising a plurality of interwoven plies (50), each ply (50) being formed of warp strands (54a-54q) extending substantially orthogonally to the chord direction and weft strands (56) extending substantially orthogonally to the longitudinal direction [0024], the warp strands (54a-54q) and the weft strands (56) including incomplete strands each having a terminal end on the pressure side or on the suction side, the pressure side and the suction side each having ply drop lines (ply drop lines shown as peaks proximate to reference 50 in Fig. 2) each connecting the terminal ends of the incomplete strands of a same ply of the fibrous reinforcement (Alexander discloses the ply drop lines include at least one first ply drop line which is consistent with the ply drop line of as claimed; [0015]), wherein the at least one first ply drop line includes at least one reinforce first ply drop line, and comprises a terminal portion which extends from the blade tip (44) to --proximately 90% of a height of the blade--, the or each terminal portion extending overall in an extension direction (angled direction of the ply drop line) forming an angle between 50° and 85° with a local tangent to the warp strands (54a-54q). Alexander discloses the height being a distance from a root end of the blade to the blade tip in the longitudinal direction, the root being at the root end of the blade.
[0015, Alexander] Plies 50 also vary in shape and size as illustrated. The design or ply layup of plies 50 can be controlled to manage the locations of specific materials and to manage the locations of the edges of plies 50, particularly the leading and trailing edges 34 and 36 of plies 50. A ply drop is formed at the edge of each ply 50. Ply drops provide initiation sites for damage and cracks. The weakest region for laminated composites is the interlaminar region between the laminates.
Although it appears the at least one ply drop line comprises a terminal portion which extends from the blade tip (44) proximately 90% of a height of the blade, Alexander is silent on the dimensional range. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend the terminal portion of the at least one drop line from the blade tip to 90% of a height of the blade as claimed since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
In reference to Claim 2
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 1, wherein, the extension direction of the terminal portion of the or each reinforced first ply drop line (see inclined direction of 50 in Fig. 2) forms an angle between 5° and 85° with a local tangent to the weft strands (56) [0015-0025] (Fig. 2).
In reference to Claim 3
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 1, wherein the terminal portion of at least one of the at least one reinforced first ply drop line is constituted by an inclined terminal portion (inclined portion of 50, Fig. 2), the extension direction (see inclined direction of 50 in Fig. 2) of which forms an angle between 10° and 65° with the local tangent to the warp strands (54a-54q). [0015-0025] (Fig. 2).
In reference to Claim 4
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 3, wherein the extension direction of the inclined terminal portion(inclined portion of 50, Fig. 2) (see inclined direction of 50 in Fig. 2) forms an angle between 25° and 80° with the local tangent to the weft strands (56). [0015-0025] (Fig. 2).
In reference to Claim 5
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 3, wherein the ply drop lines include a plurality of the reinforced first ply drop line, a majority of the terminal portions of said reinforced first ply drop lines consisting of inclined terminal portions (inclined portion of 50, Fig. 2) [0015-0025] (Fig. 2).
In reference to Claim 7
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 1, wherein the ply drop lines include at least one second ply drop line (a second ply drop line in Fig. 2), said second ply drop line (ply drop lines shown as peaks proximate to reference 50 in Fig. 2) including a transverse portion (transverse portion along the horizontal line with respect to the view in Figure 2) situated between the root (46) and 70% of the height of the blade, including an apex portion (apex of ply drop as shown in Fig. 2), the transverse portion extending overall in a transverse direction (transverse direction along the horizontal line with respect to the view in Figure 2) substantially orthogonal to the local tangent to the warp strands (54a-q Fig. 4-5), the apex portion extending over at most 10% of a distance between the leading edge (34) and the trailing edge (36) measured parallel to the transverse direction (see the horizontal peak of the ply drop line closest to the root 46; Fig. 2).
In reference to Claim 8
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 7, wherein the transverse portion (transverse portion along the horizontal line with respect to the view in Figure 2) situated between the root (46) and 70% of the height of the blade extends over at most 10% of the distance between the leading edge (34) and the trailing edge (36) measured parallel to the transverse direction (see the horizontal peak of the ply drop line closest to the root 46; Fig. 2).
In reference to Claim 9
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 1. Alexander discloses “the design or ply layup of plies 50 can be controlled to manage the locations of specific materials and to manage the locations of the edges of plies 50, particularly the leading and trailing edges 34 and 36 of plies 50. A ply drop is formed at the edge of each ply 50,” [0015].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ply drop lines of Alexander such that the ply drop lines are in greater number on the pressure side than the on the suction side in a lower region of the blade between the root (46) and 30% of the height of the blade and/or in an extended region of the blade between the root and 70% of the height of the blade as claimed for the purpose of providing a desired fibrous reinforcement configuration.
In reference to Claim 10
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 1. Alexander discloses “the design or ply layup of plies 50 can be controlled to manage the locations of specific materials and to manage the locations of the edges of plies 50, particularly the leading and trailing edges 34 and 36 of plies 50. A ply drop is formed at the edge of each ply 50,” [0015].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ply drop lines of Alexander such that the ply drop lines are, over the entire blade, in greater number on the pressure side than on the suction side as claimed for the purpose of providing a desired fibrous reinforcement configuration.
In reference to Claim 11
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 1, wherein the root (46) is configured to be inserted in a cell of a fan disc (as shown in Fig. 1), the blade (32) also comprising a stilt (dovetail root) connecting the root to the aerofoil [0011] (Fig. 1-2).
In reference to Claim 12
Alexander discloses:
A turbomachine fan (10) comprising a plurality of blades (12, 32) of claim 1 (Fig. 1).
In reference to Claim 13
Alexander discloses:
A turbomachine (10) comprising a fan (12) of claim 12 (Fig. 1).
In reference to Claim 14
Alexander discloses:
An aircraft comprising a turbomachine (10) of claim 13 [0009-0011].
In reference to Claim 15
Alexander discloses:
The blade of claim 1, wherein the ply drop lines include a plurality of first ply drop lines, each consisting of a reinforced first ply drop line (ply drop lines of 54; Fig. 2-4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Alexander discloses the blade of claim 1; however, Alexander is silent on the added shield with respect to the terminal portion as claimed in Claim 6.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AYE SU MON HTAY whose telephone number is (571)270-5958. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-3:00pm PST.
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.
/AYE S HTAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights