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 .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A: Figs 3-4 in the reply filed on 15 July 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Applicant believes several of the identified features in the Restriction mailed 15 May 2026 were not mutually exclusive based on Applicant’s Specification at [0088]).
This is not found persuasive because paragraph [0088] generically states:
“To the extent not already described, the different features and structures of the various embodiments can be used in combination, or in substitution with each other. That one feature is not illustrated in all of the embodiments is not meant to be construed that it cannot be so illustrated. For example, the features shown in the embodiment of FIGS. 3-4, 5-7, 8-9, or 10-11 can be interchanged or intermixed with one or more other embodiments of FIGS. 3-4, 5-7, 8-9, or 10-11. Thus, the various features of the different embodiments can be mixed and matched to form new embodiments, whether or not the new embodiments are expressly described. All combinations or permutations of features described herein are covered by this disclosure. Additionally, all features can be utilized within a single airfoil, like the airfoil 104 of FIG. 2, and are not mutually exclusive.”
However, such statement is not sufficient to traverse mutual exclusivity of the embodiments in the Figures. For example, because the first airfoil portion 216 takes different forms in the different species, it is not clear how to implement certain of the disengagement features from one species (e.g. 232 and 234a-c of Figs 5-7 wherein the first airfoil portion has a substantial thickness from pressure side to suction side, but a narrow extent chord-wise) to another species (e.g. Figs 3-4 with first airfoil portion 132 being very thin from pressure side to suction side, but wide in the chord-wise direction; similar comparisons can be made between the other species). Thus, at least some of the disengagement features, including their size, orientation, location, distribution, etc. are mutually exclusive between the species. Not to mention, other features such as the first airfoil portion and second airfoil portion arrangements being mutually exclusive between the species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 4 and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species C and B, respectively, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 15 July 2026.
Note, although claims 8-10 use language that, in the Specification, is only used to describe the non-elected embodiments, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language still appears to read on the elected Species A. Thus, claims 8-10 are not currently withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“combustion section, and turbine section” is believed to be in error for –a combustion section, and a turbine section—
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3, 5-14, 16-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claims 1 and 16, the recitation(s) “at least one disengagement feature having a disengagement property” is unclear whether the same disengagement property must be shared by all disengagement features (when there are plural disengagement features) or whether there is a respective disengagement property for each feature.
Regarding claim 18, “the at least one disengagement feature extends at least partially within each of the pressure side portion and the suction side portion” because it is unclear whether the same feature(s) must be in both side portions, or whether there is at least one feature in each side portion.
Dependent Claims 2-3, 5-14, and 17-20 are also rejected for relying on at least one rejected claim above.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-13, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kray 11111815.
Regarding claim 1, Kray teaches a gas turbine engine (Fig 1) comprising:
a fan section (16), a compressor section (22, 24), combustion section (26), and turbine section (28, 32) in serial flow arrangement (Fig 1), and defining an engine centerline (12) extending forward to aft (Fig 1); and
an airfoil (62) provided in one of the fan section, the compressor section, or the turbine section (col.5 ll.57-62), the airfoil comprising an outer wall (71) defining an interior (within 71), the airfoil extending from a leading edge (72) to a trailing edge (74), defining a chord-wise direction therebetween (C), and extending from a root (64) to a tip (66), defining a span-wise direction (S) therebetween, and including a pressure side (68) and a suction side (70);
a first airfoil portion (incl. the material surrounding at least one of 82) positioned within the interior (Figs 4-7); and
at least one disengagement feature (the at least one of 82) positioned within the first airfoil portion (Figs 4-7), the at least one disengagement feature having a disengagement property selected from at least one of a lesser density, a lesser mass, or a lesser tensile strength than that of the first airfoil portion (in both cases of an empty hole and a filled one; at least the density, mass, and tensile strength are lower than the surrounding material making up the first airfoil portion);
wherein the disengagement property for the at least one disengagement feature is configured to disengage a section of the airfoil at the at least one disengagement feature in response to a force exceeding a predetermined threshold (col.7 ll.1-34).
Regarding claim 16, Kray teaches an airfoil (62) for a turbine engine (Fig 1) comprising:
an outer wall (71) defining an interior (within 71), the airfoil extending from a leading edge (72) to a trailing edge (74), defining a chord-wise direction therebetween (C), and extending from a root (64) to a tip (66), defining a span-wise direction (S) therebetween, and including a pressure side (68) and a suction side (70);
a first airfoil portion (incl. the material surrounding at least one of 82) positioned within the interior (Figs 4-7); and
at least one disengagement feature (the at least one of 82) positioned within the first airfoil portion (Figs 4-7), the at least one disengagement feature having a disengagement property selected from at least one of a lesser density, a lesser mass, or a lesser tensile strength than that of the first airfoil portion (in both cases of an empty hole and a filled one; at least the density, mass, and tensile strength are lower than the surrounding material making up the first airfoil portion);
wherein the disengagement property for the at least one disengagement feature is configured to disengage a section of the airfoil at the at least one disengagement feature in response to a force exceeding a predetermined threshold (col.7 ll.1-34).
Regarding claim 2, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches a second airfoil portion (incl. at least one other adjacent one of 82) provided within the interior positioned adjacent the first airfoil portion (Figs 4-7).
Regarding claim 3, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image1.png
472
602
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kray further teaches at least one of a density or a mass of the second airfoil portion is the same as that of the at least one disengagement feature (when both of the adjacent 82’s are empty or both are filled; see example Fig 5 above).
Regarding claim 5, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image2.png
472
602
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kray further teaches the at least one disengagement feature contacts the second airfoil portion (when the second airfoil portion includes at least some material contacting the at least one first 82; see example Fig 5 above).
Regarding claim 6, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches a skin layer (portion of 71 on the pressure and suction sides) at least partially defining the outer wall and surrounding the first airfoil portion (Fig 5).
Regarding claim 7, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches a shank (incl. 76, 78, and/or 80) coupled to the first airfoil portion (Fig 4) and wherein the first airfoil portion further comprises a spar portion (central portion) extending from the shank (at least one hole 82 is formed in a central region of the airfoil as seen in the cross-section of Fig 5).
Regarding claim 8, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches the at least one disengagement feature comprises at least one aperture (82 is an aperture).
Regarding claim 9, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches the at least one aperture further comprises at least one filled aperture filled with a material having the disengagement property (Fig 7; the filler can be configured to have at least less mass than the surrounding material of the first airfoil portion).
Regarding claim 10, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches the at least one aperture includes a set of at least two apertures (Figs 4-7).
Regarding claim 11, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches the at least one disengagement feature is positioned at or exterior of 20% span in the span-wise direction (Figs 4-7).
Regarding claim 12, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches the at least one disengagement feature is formed as a strip extending within the first airfoil portion (82 can form a strip in the spanwise direction per Figs 4, 6-7).
Regarding claim 13, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches the strip is planar (the disengagement feature exists in 3 dimensions and the term “strip” seems to imply at least one dimension being much smaller than at least one other dimension; thus the term planar is interpreted to mean extending along a single direction or vector when viewed in at least one plane; this is the case in Figs 4 and 6) and aligned with the span-wise direction (Figs 4-6).
Regarding claim 17, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image3.png
472
602
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kray further teaches a second airfoil portion positioned within the interior and separating the first airfoil portion into a pressure side portion and a suction side portion (see example Fig 5 above).
Regarding claim 18, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image4.png
472
602
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kray further teaches the at least one disengagement feature extends at least partially within each of the pressure side portion and the suction side portion (see example Fig 5 above).
Regarding claim 19, Kray teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Kray further teaches a shank (incl. 76, 78, and/or 80) coupled to the first airfoil portion (Figs 4-7), and wherein the first airfoil portion is a spar portion (central portion relative to the chord-wise direction) extending from the shank (Figs 4-7).
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-13, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jain 10920607.
Regarding claim 1, Jain teaches a gas turbine engine (Fig 1) comprising:
a fan section (12), a compressor section (16, 18), combustion section (20), and turbine section (22, 24) in serial flow arrangement (Fig 1), and defining an engine centerline (11) extending forward to aft (Fig 1); and
an airfoil (30) provided in the fan section, the airfoil comprising an outer wall (incl. 35, 36, 38, 39) defining an interior (within the boundaries of 35, 36, 38, 39), the airfoil extending from a leading edge (38) to a trailing edge (39), defining a chord-wise direction therebetween (Figs 2-3, 7-8, and 12), and extending from a root (where 35, 36, 38, 39 meet 33) to a tip (34), defining a span-wise direction therebetween (Figs 2-3, 7-8, 12), and including a pressure side (35) and a suction side (36);
a first airfoil portion (incl. at least a portion of chambers 62, 72, 162, 272, 274 and the surrounding material) positioned within the interior (Figs 2-15); and
at least one disengagement feature (at least one chamber(s) 62, 72, 162, 272, and/or 274) positioned within the first airfoil portion (Figs 2-15), the at least one disengagement feature having a disengagement property selected from at least one of a lesser density, a lesser mass, or a lesser tensile strength than that of the first airfoil portion (both when the chambers are empty and when they are filled with Aluminum while the surrounding material of the first airfoil portion is Titanium; col.5 l.61 – col.6 l.11);
wherein the disengagement property for the at least one disengagement feature is configured to disengage a section of the airfoil at the at least one disengagement feature in response to a force exceeding a predetermined threshold (col.4 ll.22-34).
Regarding claim 16, Jain teaches an airfoil (30) for a turbine engine (Fig 1), the airfoil comprising:
an outer wall (incl. 35, 36, 38, 39) defining an interior (within the boundaries of 35, 36, 38, 39), the airfoil extending from a leading edge (38) to a trailing edge (39), defining a chord-wise direction therebetween (Figs 2-3, 7-8, and 12), and extending from a root (where 35, 36, 38, 39 meet 33) to a tip (34), defining a span-wise direction therebetween (Figs 2-3, 7-8, 12), and including a pressure side (35) and a suction side (36);
a first airfoil portion (incl. at least a portion of chambers 62, 72, 162, 272, 274 and the surrounding material) positioned within the interior (Figs 2-15); and
at least one disengagement feature (at least one chamber(s) 62, 72, 162, 272, and/or 274) positioned within the first airfoil portion (Figs 2-15), the at least one disengagement feature having a disengagement property selected from at least one of a lesser density, a lesser mass, or a lesser tensile strength than that of the first airfoil portion (both when the chambers are empty and when they are filled with Aluminum while the surrounding material of the first airfoil portion is Titanium; col.5 l.61 – col.6 l.11);
wherein the disengagement property for the at least one disengagement feature is configured to disengage a section of the airfoil at the at least one disengagement feature in response to a force exceeding a predetermined threshold (col.4 ll.22-34).
Regarding claim 2, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches a second airfoil portion (any adjacent portion to the first portion in the airfoil) provided within the interior positioned adjacent the first airfoil portion (see below for further detailed examples as needed).
Regarding claim 3, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image5.png
750
428
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Jain further teaches at least one of a density or a mass of the second airfoil portion is the same as that of the at least one disengagement feature (for example, Figs 8-11; annotated Fig 9 above).
Regarding claim 5, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image6.png
587
374
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Jain further teaches the at least one disengagement feature contacts the second airfoil portion (for example, Fig 4 above).
Regarding claim 6, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches a skin layer (forming the outer surface of 31 in Fig 3) at least partially defining the outer wall and surrounding the first airfoil portion (Figs 3-4).
Regarding claim 7, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches a shank (33) coupled to the first airfoil portion (Figs 2-3, 7-8, and 12) and wherein the first airfoil portion further comprises a spar portion (central portion) extending from the shank (Figs 2-15).
Regarding claim 8, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches the at least one disengagement feature comprises at least one aperture (Figs 2-15; chambers 62, 72, 162, 272, 274 are apertures, just as Applicant describes Applicant’s apertures 236, 238, etc.).
Regarding claim 9, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches the at least one aperture further comprises at least one filled aperture filled with a material having the disengagement property (Figs 12-15; 274 may be filled with aluminum while the surrounding material is titanium).
Regarding claim 10, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches the at least one aperture includes a set of at least two apertures (Figs 2-7 and 12-15).
Regarding claim 11, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches the at least one disengagement feature is positioned at or exterior of 20% span in the span-wise direction (Figs 2-3, 7-8, 12).
Regarding claim 12, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches the at least one disengagement feature is formed as a strip extending within the first airfoil portion (Figs 2-11).
Regarding claim 13, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches the strip is planar (the disengagement feature exists in 3 dimensions and the term “strip” seems to imply at least one dimension being much smaller than at least one other dimension; thus the term planar is interpreted to mean extending along a single direction or vector when viewed in at least one plane; this is the case in Figs 2-11) and aligned with the chord-wise direction (Figs 2-11).
Regarding claim 17, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image7.png
587
374
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
750
428
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Jain further teaches a second airfoil portion positioned within the interior and separating the first airfoil portion into a pressure side portion and a suction side portion (for example, Figs 8-11 w/annotated Fig 9 above; or Figs 2-6 w/ annotated Fig 4 above).
Regarding claim 18, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches the at least one disengagement feature extends at least partially within each of the pressure side portion and the suction side portion (in at least the two exemplary ways of Figs 2-11 as discussed above).
Regarding claim 19, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain further teaches a shank (33) coupled to the first airfoil portion (Figs 2-3 and 7-8), and wherein the first airfoil portion is a spar portion (central portion along the chord direction) extending from the shank (Figs 2-3 and 7-8).
Regarding claim 20, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above.
PNG
media_image8.png
750
428
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Jain further teaches the at least one disengagement feature is unitary with the second airfoil portion, and extends into the first airfoil portion from the second airfoil portion (Figs 8-11; annotated Fig 9 above).
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.
Claim 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jain in view of Kray.
Regarding claim 14, Jain teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention as discussed above. Jain does not teach the strip curves in at least one of the span-wise direction or the chord-wise direction.
However, Kray teaches that strip-like disengagement features for airfoils in a gas turbine engine can be made straight or curved in the chordwise direction (Figs 2-3 versus Fig 8; col.6 ll.21-end, col.9 l.60 – col.10 l.10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the straight chord-wise extending strip of Jain to be curved as taught by Kray in order to enable detachment along a desired frangible line that may desirably be curved (Kray, Figs 2-3 versus Fig 8; col.6 ll.21-end, col.9 l.60 – col.10 l.10).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE SEBASCO CHENG whose telephone number is (469)295-9153. The examiner can normally be reached 0600-0900 AM ET M-F and 1-2PM T/R.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/STEPHANIE SEBASCO CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights