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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 7, line 3; claim 18, line 2-3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “one or more bypass stators extending across a bypass flow path of the gas turbine engine” should be - - the one or more bypass stators extending across the bypass flow path of the gas turbine engine- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9, line 3; claim 20, line -3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “an intermediate case” should be - - the intermediate case- -. Appropriate correction is required.
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(s) 1, 4-9, 11-12, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swift (US 20170081973 as referenced in OA dated 9/22/2025) in view of Giannakopoulos (US 20130323077 as referenced in OA dated 9/22/2025) and Dennison et al (US 4704862)
PNG
media_image1.png
518
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3 of Swift
Regarding claim 1, Swift discloses a fan and low-pressure compressor assembly (The assembly of Figure 1; 14, 18) of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10), comprising:
a fan (Figure 1; 14) operably connected to a first shaft (Figure 3; 312, 364, 318, 344) of the gas turbine engine; and
a low-pressure compressor rotor (Annotated Figure 3; labeled compressor rotor) operably connected to the first shaft, the low-pressure compressor rotor and the fan sharing a common central longitudinal axis (Figure 1; 31);
wherein a fan load path (The load path from (and including) Figure 3; 340 through 334, 322 to 338, Paragraph 0044) of the fan is separate from a low-pressure compressor rotor load path (The load path from (and including) Figure 3; 362 to the engine case 338, Paragraph 0050) of the low-pressure compressor rotor;
wherein the low-pressure compressor includes a low pressure compressor shaft (Annotated Figure 3; labeled low pressure shaft) that is operably connected to the first shaft and axially overlaps the first shaft;
wherein:
the fan load path is directed to an engine outer case (Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator which is the same as Figure 2; 24. Paragraph 0033) via one or more bypass flow path stators (Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator) of the gas turbine engine;
the low-pressure compressor load path is directed to an airframe engine mount (The attachment of Figure 3; 338 to the wing, Paragraph 0033) via an intermediate case (Figure 3; 338) of the engine, the intermediate case disposed axially downstream of the engine outer case.
Swift does not disclose wherein the low pressure compressor shaft is operably connected to the first shaft via a spline connection;
the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine.
However, Giannakopoulos teaches wherein a low-pressure compressor shaft (The shaft having Figure 2; 54) is operably connected to a first shaft (Figure 2; 32) via a spline connection (Figure 2; 54, 56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift wherein the low-pressure compressor shaft is operably connected to the first shaft via a spline connection as taught by and suggested by Giannakopoulos in order to increase stiffness while minimizing weight (Paragraph 0023, The modification uses the coupling from the low pressure shaft to the fan shaft of Giannakopoulos).
Swift in view of Giannakopoulos does not teach the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine.
However, Dennison teaches a low-pressure compressor load path (The load path from Figure 2; 55, 59 through 50, 49, 48. Column 4-5, lines 48-2) is directed to an airframe engine mount (The engine airframe mount of Column 4-5, lines 48-2) via an intermediate case (Figure 2; 50, 49, 48, 34) of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10), the intermediate case disposed axially downstream of an engine outer case (Figure 1; 35), the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes (Figure 2; 50) of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10) and via one or more outer vanes (Figure 2; 48) of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath (The flowpath through Figure 1; 42, 48) of the gas turbine engine.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift in view of Giannakopoulos wherein the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine as taught by and suggested by Dennison in order to support the compressor shafts (Column 4-5, lines 48-2) and because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Dennison’s use of an intermediate case according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos’s gas turbine engine, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case straightening the bypass flow, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification adds inner vanes between the low and high pressure compressor of Swift and adds fan exit guide vanes, which is separate from Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator of Swift, to Swift).
Regarding claim 4, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses wherein the low-pressure compressor shaft concentric with and operably connected to the first shaft.
Regarding claim 5, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings (Figure 3; 362) supportive of the low-pressure compressor shaft.
Regarding claim 6, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses a fan bearing (Figure 3; 340) supportive of the first shaft upstream of the one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings.
Regarding claim 7, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses a fan bearing support (Figure 3; 334, 322) operably connected to the fan bearing and operably connected to the one or more bypass stators extending across a bypass flow path (Annotated Figure 3; labeled bypass flow path) of the gas turbine engine.
Regarding claim 8, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses wherein the fan bearing is disposed axially between the fan and the one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings.
Regarding claim 9, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses a low-pressure compressor bearing support (The support that transmit the load from Figure 3; 362 to 228, Paragraph 0050) operably connected to the one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings and operably connected to the intermediate case of the gas turbine engine.
Regarding claim 11, Swift teaches a fan and low-pressure compressor assembly (The assembly of Figure 1; 14, 18) of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10), comprising:
a fan (Figure 1; 14) operably connected to a first shaft (Figure 3; 312, 364, 318, 344) of the gas turbine engine;
a fan bearing (Figure 3; 340) to support the first shaft;
a low-pressure compressor rotor (Annotated Figure 3; labeled compressor rotor);
a low-pressure compressor shaft (Annotated Figure 3; labeled low pressure shaft) operably connected to the low-pressure compressor rotor, the low-pressure compressor shaft concentric with and operably connected to the first shaft and axially overlaps the first shaft; and
one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings (Figure 3; 362) disposed at and supportive of the low-pressure compressor shaft;
wherein:
a fan load path (The load path from (and including) Figure 3; 340 through 334, 322 to 338, Paragraph 0044) is directed to an engine outer case (Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator which is the same as Figure 2; 24. Paragraph 0033) via one or more bypass flow path stators (Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator) of the gas turbine engine; and
a low-pressure compressor load path (The load path from (and including) Figure 3; 362 to the engine case 338, Paragraph 0050) is directed from the one or more low compressor shaft bearings to an airframe engine mount (The attachment of Figure 3; 338 to the wing, Paragraph 0033) via an intermediate case (Figure 3; 338) of the engine, the intermediate case disposed axially downstream of the engine outer case.
Swift does not disclose wherein the low pressure compressor shaft is operably connected to the first shaft via a spline connection;
the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine.
However, Giannakopoulos teaches wherein a low-pressure compressor shaft (The shaft having Figure 2; 54) is operably connected to a first shaft (Figure 2; 32) via a spline connection (Figure 2; 54, 56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift wherein the low-pressure compressor shaft is operably connected to the first shaft via a spline connection as taught by and suggested by Giannakopoulos in order to increase stiffness while minimizing weight (Paragraph 0023, The modification uses the coupling from the low pressure shaft to the fan shaft of Giannakopoulos).
Swift in view of Giannakopoulos does not teach the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine.
However, Dennison teaches a low-pressure compressor load path (The load path from Figure 2; 55, 59 through 50, 49, 48. Column 4-5, lines 48-2) is directed to an airframe engine mount (The engine airframe mount of Column 4-5, lines 48-2) via an intermediate case (Figure 2; 50, 49, 48, 34) of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10), the intermediate case disposed axially downstream of an engine outer case (Figure 1; 35), the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes (Figure 2; 50) of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10) and via one or more outer vanes (Figure 2; 48) of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath (The flowpath through Figure 1; 42, 48) of the gas turbine engine.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift in view of Giannakopoulos wherein the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine as taught by and suggested by Dennison in order to support the compressor shafts (Column 4-5, lines 48-2) and because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Dennison’s use of an intermediate case according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos’s gas turbine engine, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case straightening the bypass flow, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification adds inner vanes between the low and high pressure compressor of Swift and adds fan exit guide vanes, which is separate from Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator of Swift, to Swift).
Regarding claim 12, Swift discloses a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10), comprising:
a combustor (Figure 1; 22);
a turbine (Figure 1; 26) driven by operation of the combustor (Paragraph 0003); and
a fan and low-pressure compressor assembly (The assembly of Figure 1; 14, 18) operably connected to and driven by operation of the turbine, the fan and low-pressure compressor assembly including:
a fan (Figure 1; 14) operably connected to a first shaft (Figure 3; 312, 364, 318, 344) of the gas turbine engine; and
a low-pressure compressor rotor (Annotated Figure 3; labeled compressor rotor) operably connected to the first shaft, the low-pressure compressor rotor and the fan sharing a common central longitudinal axis;
wherein a fan load path (The load path from (and including) Figure 3; 340 through 334, 322 to 338, Paragraph 0044) of the fan is separate from a low-pressure compressor rotor load path (The load path from (and including) Figure 3; 362 to the engine case 338, Paragraph 0050) of the low-pressure compressor rotor;
wherein the low-pressure compressor includes a low pressure compressor shaft (Annotated Figure 3; labeled low pressure shaft) that is operably connected to the first shaft and axially overlaps the first shaft;
wherein:
the fan load path is directed to an engine outer case (Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator which is the same as Figure 2; 24. Paragraph 0033) via one or more bypass flow path stators (Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator) of the gas turbine engine;
the low-pressure compressor load path is directed to an airframe engine mount (The attachment of Figure 3; 338 to the wing, Paragraph 0033) via an intermediate case (Figure 3; 338) of the engine, the intermediate case disposed axially downstream of the engine outer case.
Swift does not disclose wherein the low pressure compressor shaft is operably connected to the first shaft via a spline connection;
the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine.
However, Giannakopoulos teaches wherein a low-pressure compressor shaft (The shaft having Figure 2; 54) is operably connected to a first shaft (Figure 2; 32) via a spline connection (Figure 2; 54, 56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift wherein the low-pressure compressor shaft is operably connected to the first shaft via a spline connection as taught by and suggested by Giannakopoulos in order to increase stiffness while minimizing weight (Paragraph 0023, The modification uses the coupling from the low pressure shaft to the fan shaft of Giannakopoulos).
Swift in view of Giannakopoulos does not teach the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine.
However, Dennison teaches a low-pressure compressor load path (The load path from Figure 2; 55, 59 through 50, 49, 48. Column 4-5, lines 48-2) is directed to an airframe engine mount (The engine airframe mount of Column 4-5, lines 48-2) via an intermediate case (Figure 2; 50, 49, 48, 34) of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10), the intermediate case disposed axially downstream of an engine outer case (Figure 1; 35), the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes (Figure 2; 50) of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of a gas turbine engine (Figure 1; 10) and via one or more outer vanes (Figure 2; 48) of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath (The flowpath through Figure 1; 42, 48) of the gas turbine engine.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift in view of Giannakopoulos wherein the low-pressure compressor load path directed to the airframe engine mount via one or more inner vanes of the intermediate case extending across a core flowpath of the gas turbine engine and via one or more outer vanes of the intermediate case extending across a bypass flowpath of the gas turbine engine as taught by and suggested by Dennison in order to support the compressor shafts (Column 4-5, lines 48-2) and because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Dennison’s use of an intermediate case according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos’s gas turbine engine, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case straightening the bypass flow, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification adds inner vanes between the low and high pressure compressor of Swift and adds fan exit guide vanes, which is separate from Annotated Figure 3; labeled stator of Swift, to Swift).
Regarding claim 15, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses wherein the low-pressure compressor shaft is concentric with the first shaft.
Regarding claim 16, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings (Figure 3; 362) supportive of the low-pressure compressor shaft.
Regarding claim 17, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses a fan bearing (Figure 3; 340)) supportive of the first shaft upstream of the one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings.
Regarding claim 18, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses a fan bearing support (Figure 3; 334, 322) operably connected to the fan bearing and operably connected to the one or more bypass stators extending across a bypass flow path (Annotated Figure 3; labeled bypass flow path) of the gas turbine engine.
Regarding claim 19, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses wherein the fan bearing is disposed axially between the fan and the one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings.
Regarding claim 20, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift further discloses a low-pressure compressor bearing support (The support that transmits the load from Figure 3; 362 to 228, Paragraph 0050) operably connected to the one or more low pressure compressor shaft bearings and operably connected to the intermediate case of the gas turbine engine.
Claim(s) 3, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison as applied to claim 2, 13 above, and further in view of Edgley et al (US 4371133 as referenced in OA dated 4/24/2025).
Regarding claim 3, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison does not teach a vibration isolator disposed axially between the engine outer case and the intermediate case.
However, Edgley teaches a vibration isolator (Figure 3; 25) disposed axially between an engine outer case (Figure 4; 22) and an intermediate case (Figure 4; 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison to include a vibration isolator disposed axially between the engine outer case and the intermediate case as taught by and suggested by Edgley in order to isolate vibrations (Column 3, lines 10-13, The modification adds a vibration isolator between the engine outer case and intermediate case).
Regarding claim 14, Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison teaches the invention as claimed.
Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison does not teach a vibration isolator disposed axially between the engine outer case and the intermediate case.
However, Edgley teaches a vibration isolator (Figure 3; 25) disposed axially between an engine outer case (Figure 4; 22) and an intermediate case (Figure 4; 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Swift in view of Giannakopoulos and Dennison to include a vibration isolator disposed axially between the engine outer case and the intermediate case as taught by and suggested by Edgley in order to isolate vibrations (Column 3, lines 10-13, The modification adds a vibration isolator between the engine outer case and intermediate case)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 11, 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McDonald et al (US 20120051923) states in Paragraph 0006 that outlet guide vanes are used to remove swirl from the bypass airflow
Albouy et al (US 20240239062) states in Paragraph 0005 that exit guide vanes are used to straighten the bypass airflow
Wilshaw et al (US 20200003122) shows in Figure 1 a turbofan engine having both a strut and outlet guide vanes
Spruce et al (US 20210172383) shows in Figure 1 a turbofan engine having both a strut and outlet guide vanes
Clemen et al (US 20110011058) shows Figure 1 a turbofan engine having both a strut and outlet guide vanes
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 EDWIN G KANG whose telephone number is (571)272-9814. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/EDWIN KANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
