DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the Patent Application filed 10/7/2024 wherein claims 1-8 are presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the United Kingdom on 10/30/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the GB 2316523.6 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 “temperature measurement sensor is positioned circumferentially coincident each one of the outlet guide vanes” (Claim 4, lines 3-4) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The drawings do not show a single temperature measurement sensor being positioned with every outlet guide vane. 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, 4, 7, and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“array of NBURN burner assemblies” (Claim 1, line 4 and Claim 8, line 6) is believed to be in error for - - array of burner assemblies - -;
“array of NNGV nozzle guide vanes” (Claim 1, line 6 and Claim 8, line 8) is believed to be in error for - -array of nozzle guide vanes - -;
“array of NOGV outlet guide vanes” (Claim 1, line 7 and Claim 8, line 9) is believed to be in error for - - array of outlet guide vanes - -;
“a one temperature measurement rake” (Claim 1, lines 11-12 and Claim 8, lines 14-15) is believed to be in error for - - one temperature measurement rake - -;
“a one burner” (Claim 1, line 13 and Claim 8, line 16) is believed to be in error for - - one burner - -;
“anad” (Claim 1, line 15) is believed to be in error for - -and - -;
“positioned circumferentially coincident each” (Claim 4, line 4) is believed to be in error for - - positioned circumferentially coincident with each - -; and
“the fan diameter DFAN” (Claim 7, line 3) is believed to be in error for - - a fan diameter - -.
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 1-8 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a turbine assembly comprising, in axial flow sequence, a second circumferential array of NNGV nozzle guide vanes, a turbine assembly, a third circumferential array of NOGV outlet guide vanes, and a fourth circumferential array of temperature measurement rakes” in lines 5-8). It is unclear how a “turbine assembly” can comprise, amongst other things, “a turbine assembly”. In addition, it is unclear if the “turbine assembly recited in line 6 of claim 1 is referring to the same “turbine assembly” recited in lines 2-3 of claim 1, or a different turbine assembly.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a second circumferential array of NNGV nozzle guide vanes" in lines 5-6. It is unclear if the claims require four circumferential arrays, wherein the second circumferential array includes nozzle guide vanes, or if the claim requires two circumferential arrays of nozzle guide vanes. Therefore, the number of circumferential arrays of nozzle guide vanes required by the claim is unclear.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a third circumferential array of NOGV outlet guide vanes" in lines 6-7. It is unclear if the claims require four circumferential arrays, wherein the third circumferential array includes outlet guide vanes, or if the claim requires three circumferential arrays of outlet guide vanes. Therefore, the number of circumferential arrays of outlet guide vanes required by the claim is unclear.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a fourth circumferential array of temperature measurement rakes" in lines 7-8. It is unclear if the claims require four circumferential arrays, wherein the fourth circumferential array includes temperature measurement rakes, or if the claim requires four circumferential arrays of temperature measurement rakes. Therefore, the number of circumferential arrays of temperature measurement rakes required by the claim is unclear.
Claims 2-7 are rejected for the same reason discussed above based on their dependency to Claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the fan diameter" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “arranging the turbine assembly to comprise, in axial flow sequence, a second circumferential array of NNGV nozzle guide vanes, a turbine assembly, a third circumferential array of NOGV outlet guide vanes, and a fourth circumferential array of temperature measurement rakes” in lines 5-8). It is unclear how a “turbine assembly” can comprise, amongst other things, “a turbine assembly”. In addition, it is unclear if the “turbine assembly recited in line 8 of claim 8 is referring to the same “turbine assembly” recited in line 4 of claim 8, or a different turbine assembly.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "a second circumferential array of NNGV nozzle guide vanes" in lines 7-8. It is unclear if the claims require four circumferential arrays, wherein the second circumferential array includes nozzle guide vanes, or if the claim requires two circumferential arrays of nozzle guide vanes. Therefore, the number of circumferential arrays of nozzle guide vanes required by the claim is unclear.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “a third circumferential array of NOGV outlet guide vanes" in line 9. It is unclear if the claims require four circumferential arrays, wherein the third circumferential array includes outlet guide vanes, or if the claim requires three circumferential arrays of outlet guide vanes. Therefore, the number of circumferential arrays of outlet guide vanes required by the claim is unclear.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “a fourth circumferential array of temperature measurement rakes" in lines 9-10. It is unclear if the claims require four circumferential arrays, wherein the fourth circumferential array includes temperature measurement rakes, or if the claim requires four circumferential arrays of temperature measurement rakes. Therefore, the number of circumferential arrays of temperature measurement rakes required by the claim is unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 4 recites the limitation “a temperature measurement sensor is positioned circumferentially coincident each one of the outlet guide vanes” in lines 3-4. Therefore, this limitation appears to require every outlet guide vane to be at the same circumferential location so that they are all circumferentially coincident with a single temperature measurement sensor. However, claim 4 is dependent on claim 1 which recites a “circumferential array of NOGV outlet guide vanes”, requiring outlet guide vanes at different circumferential locations. Thus, claim 4 fails to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
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, 3, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 5,461,855) in view of Napoli et al. (US 5,106,203).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Inoue teaches (Figures 1-6C) a gas turbine engine (see abstract; Column 1, lines 9-11; and Figure 6A), the gas turbine engine (see Figure 6A) comprising, in axial flow sequence, a compressor assembly (the rotor assembly upstream of combustor 10; see Figure 6A), a combustor assembly (10), a turbine assembly (38), and an exhaust assembly (downstream of 38; see Figures 1 and 6A), the combustor assembly (10) comprising a first circumferential array of burner assemblies (34),
the turbine assembly comprising (38), in axial flow sequence, a second circumferential array of nozzle guide vanes (annotated below), a turbine assembly (annotated below), a third circumferential array of outlet guide vanes (annotated below), and a fourth circumferential array of temperature measurement rakes (36),
a clocking position (see Figures 6A-6C) being defined by a relative circumferential orientation of the first circumferential array (the array of 34, within 15) with the fourth circumferential array (the array of 36; see Figures 6A-6C), in which a one temperature measurement rake (36) in the fourth circumferential array (the array of 36; see Figure 6C), is aligned directly with one burner (34, within 15) in the first circumferential array (see Figures 6A-6C), and
wherein, a quantity of burner assemblies (34) are positioned in the first circumferential array (the array of 34, within 15), and a quantity of temperature measurement rakes (36) are positioned in the fourth circumferential array (the array of 36, see Figure 6C), such that there is a minimum quantity of five clocking positions between the fourth circumferential array and the first circumferential array (there are eight clocking positions due to the presence of eight burners and eight temperature measurement devices that are distributed at different circumferential locations about a longitudinal axis of the engine; see Figures 6A-6C).
Inoue does not teach that the temperature rake comprises a plurality of temperature measurement sensors.
Napoli teaches (Figures 1-10) a temperature rake (300) comprises a plurality of temperature measurement sensors (331, 332, 333; see Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue to have the temperature rake comprise a plurality of temperature measurement sensors, as taught by Napoli, in order to accurately measure the temperature of the exhaust gas with an outboard peaked temperature profile (Column 6, lines 40-42 of Napoli).
PNG
media_image1.png
496
820
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Inoue in view of Napoli teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Inoue further teaches (Figures 1-6C) wherein each temperature measurement sensor (36) is positioned immediately downstream of (see Figure 6C) a corresponding one of the outlet guide vanes (annotated above).
Regarding Claim 6, Inoue in view of Napoli teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Inoue in view of Napoli does not teach wherein the gas turbine engine further comprises a fan assembly, the fan assembly being positioned axially upstream of the compressor assembly.
Napoli teaches (Figures 1-10) a gas turbine engine (see Figure 1) that comprises a fan assembly (112), the fan assembly (112) being positioned axially upstream of (see Figure 1) a compressor assembly (113, 114).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue in view of Napoli to have the gas turbine engine further comprises a fan assembly, the fan assembly being positioned axially upstream of the compressor assembly, as taught by Napoli, in order to use the extracted additional energy from the exhaust gas to drive a fan (Column 4, lines 47-52 of Napoli).
Regarding Independent Claim 8, Inoue teaches (Figures 1-6C) a method for determining clocking positions (see Figures 6A-6C) for a combustor (10) and turbine (38) of a gas turbine engine (see abstract; Column 1, lines 9-11; and Figure 6A), the method comprising the steps of:
providing, in axial flow sequence, a compressor assembly (the rotor assembly upstream of combustor 10; see Figure 6A), a combustor assembly (10), a turbine assembly (38), and an exhaust assembly (downstream of 38; see Figures 1 and 6A),
arranging the combustor assembly (10) to comprise a first circumferential array of burner assemblies (34),
arranging the turbine assembly (38) to comprise, in axial flow sequence, a second circumferential array of nozzle guide vanes (annotated above), a turbine assembly (38), a third circumferential array of outlet guide vanes (annotated above), and a fourth circumferential array of temperature measurement rakes (36),
defining a clocking position (see Figures 6A-6C) as a relative circumferential orientation of the first circumferential array (the array of 34, within 15) with the fourth circumferential array (the array of 36; see Figures 6A-6C), in which a one temperature measurement rake (36) in the fourth circumferential array (the array of 36; see Figure 6C), is aligned directly with one burner (34, within 15) in the first circumferential array (see Figures 6A-6C), and
positioning the quantity of burner assemblies (34) in the first circumferential array (the array of 34, within 15), and the respective quantity of temperature measurement rakes (36) in the fourth circumferential array (the array of 36; see Figure 6C), such that there is a minimum quantity of five clocking positions between the fourth circumferential array and the first circumferential array (there are eight clocking positions due to the presence of eight burners and eight temperature measurement devices that are distributed at different circumferential locations about a longitudinal axis of the engine; see Figures 6A-6C).
Inoue does not teach that the temperature rake comprises a plurality of temperature measurement sensors.
Napoli teaches (Figures 1-10) a temperature rake (300) comprises a plurality of temperature measurement sensors (331, 332, 333; see Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue to have the temperature rake comprise a plurality of temperature measurement sensors, as taught by Napoli, in order to accurately measure the temperature of the exhaust gas with an outboard peaked temperature profile (Column 6, lines 40-42 of Napoli).
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 5,461,855) in view of Napoli et al. (US 5,106,203) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of either Subramanian (US 2005/0198967) or Li et al. (US 2023/0366553).
Regarding Claim 2, Inoue in view of Napoli teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Inoue in view of Napoli does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein each temperature measurement sensor is positioned within a corresponding one of the outlet guide vanes.
Subramanian teaches (Figures 1-12) that sensors (50) may be positioned within a corresponding one of a plurality of turbine outlet vanes (22; see Figures 1 and 5) and Li teaches (Figures 1-9) that temperature measurement devices (60) may be positioned on a corresponding one of the outlet guide vanes (49, at the outlet of turbines 17 and 42; see Paragraph 0080 and Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue in view of Napoli to have each temperature measurement sensor is positioned within a corresponding one of the outlet guide vanes, as taught by either Subramanian or Li, in order to allow for monitoring the condition of the turbine components during operation of the combustion turbine without an extensive array of wires to be routed within the combustion turbine (Paragraph 0050 of Subramanian) and in order to measure the turbine gas temperature (Paragraph 0072 of Li).
Regarding Claim 4, Inoue in view of Napoli teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Napoli teaches (Figures 1-10) that the temperature measurement rake (300) comprises a circumferential array of temperature sensors (331, 332, 333; see Figure 3).
Inoue in view of Napoli does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein a temperature measurement sensor is positioned circumferentially coincident each one of the outlet guide vanes.
Subramanian teaches (Figures 1-12) that sensors (50) may be positioned circumferentially coincident with each one of a plurality of turbine outlet vanes (22; see Figures 1 and 5) and Li teaches (Figures 1-9) that temperature measurement devices (60) may be positioned circumferentially coincidcent each one of the outlet guide vanes (49, at the outlet of turbines 17 and 42; see Paragraph 0080 and Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue in view of Napoli to have the temperature measurement sensor be positioned circumferentially coincident each one of the outlet guide vanes, as taught by either Subramanian or Li, in order to allow for monitoring the condition of the turbine components during operation of the combustion turbine without an extensive array of wires to be routed within the combustion turbine (Paragraph 0050 of Subramanian) and in order to measure the turbine gas temperature (Paragraph 0072 of Li).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 5,461,855) in view of Napoli et al. (US 5,106,203) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ponziani (US 7,784,263).
Regarding Claim 5, Inoue in view of Napoli teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Inoue in view of Napoli does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein the quantity of temperature measurement sensors is less than the quantity of outlet guide vanes.
Ponziani teaches (Figures 1-7) wherein the quantity of temperature measurement sensors (40, eight sensors shown in Figure 2) is less than the quantity of outlet guide vanes (34, fourteen shown in Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue in view of Napoli to have the quantity of temperature measurement sensors be less than the quantity of outlet guide vanes, as taught by Ponziani, in order to decrease cost and sensor system complexity, reduce the failure rate of sensors and avoid measurement error (Column 1, lines 45-52 of Ponziani).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 5,461,855) in view of Napoli et al. (US 5,106,203) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Taylor (4,860,537).
Regarding Claim 7, Inoue in view of Napoli teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Inoue in view of Napoli does not teach, as discussed so far, wherein the fan assembly has two or more stages, at least one of the fan stages comprising a plurality of fan blades defining the fan diameter.
Taylor teaches (Figures 1-2B) a fan assembly (54) having two or more stages (at 60 and 62), at least one of the fan stages (at 60) comprising a plurality of fan blades (60) defining a fan diameter (see Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue in view of Napoli to provide the fan assembly with two or more stages, at least one of the fan stages comprising a plurality of fan blades defining the fan diameter, as taught by Taylor, in order to remove the swirl or circumferential component of air imparted by the counter rotating fan blade row so that only a relatively small number of struts are required to support the cowl (Column 4, lines 8-17 of Taylor).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS P BURKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5407. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 PM.
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.
/THOMAS P BURKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights