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 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) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powell et al (US 20200386189 as referenced in OA dated 5/9/2025) in view of Vise et al (US 20180355822 as referenced in OA dated 5/9/2025) and Silkowski et al (US 20150323185) (Please note that these use a first interpretation of the prior art)
Regarding claim 1, Powell discloses an assembly (Figure 3) for a turbine engine (Figure 3; 250, 220, 205, 224), comprising:
a supplemental thrust section (Figure 3; 218, 246) comprising a rotating detonation combustor (Figure 3; 274. Paragraph 0097); and
a duct (The duct forming Figure 3; 218, 246 which includes at least 270, the casing defining 254, 256, and 236) comprising a supplemental thrust section inlet (Figure 3; 218) fluidly coupled with and leading to the rotating detonation combustor,
a turbine section (Figure 3; 224, 226) fluidly coupled with and upstream of the duct, the turbine section extending along an axial centerline (Figure 3; 206) of the turbine engine;
a flow of gas (The flow of gas exhausted from the turbine section to the supplemental thrust section) exhausted from the turbine section into the supplemental thrust section.
Powell does not disclose the supplemental thrust section inlet comprising a flow area that decreases as at least a first portion of the supplemental thrust section inlet extends towards the rotating detonation combustor;
a flow regulator configured to regulate a flow of gas exhausted from the turbine section into the supplemental thrust section, the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes arranged circumferentially about the axial centerline, at an axial position at or downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet, and the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline;
wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis extending radially with respect to the axial centerline.
However, Vise teaches a rotating detonation combustor (The portion of Figure 12; 122 downstream of 128 of 202);
a rotating detonation combustor inlet (The portion of Figure 12; 100 with 128 of 202 and 210) comprising a flow area (The flow area of Figure 7; 148. Paragraph 0062) that decreases as at least a first portion (The converging portion of Figure 7; 150) of the rotating detonation combustor inlet extends towards the rotating detonation combustor;
a flow regulator (Figure 12; 210) configured to regulate a flow (The flow into the rotating detonation chamber) of gas exhausted from the turbine section into the rotating detonation combustor (Functional Language), the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes (Paragraph 0083) at an axial position at or downstream of the rotating detonation combustor inlet (The stator vanes are at the rotating detonation combustor inlet).
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 Powell to include a rotating detonation combustor inlet (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section) comprising a flow area that decreases as at least a first portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet extends towards the rotating detonation combustor; a flow regulator configured to regulate a flow (In the context of Powell this is a flow of gas exhaust from the turbine section) into the rotating detonation combustor, the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes at an axial position at or downstream of the rotating detonation combustor inlet as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, The modification uses the RDC of Vise in Powell).
Powell in view of Vise does not teach wherein the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline;
wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis extending radially with respect to the axial centerline.
However, Silkowski teaches an assembly (Figure 5) for a turbine engine (Figure 4), comprising:
a flow regulator (Figure 4; 128) configured to regulate a flow of gas (The flow of gas through Figure 4; 14, 16, 18. Functional Language, 128 regulates the flow of gas into 16 because when Figure 5; 128 is more vertical there is less flow of gas than when 128 is more horizontal) into a combustor (Figure 4; 16), the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes (Figure 4; 128 is a vane, Paragraph 0028, 0029) arranged circumferentially about an axial centerline (Figure 4; 24), and the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline;
wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis (The axis of Paragraph 0029) extending radially with respect to the axial centerline.
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 Powell in view of Vise wherein the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline; wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis extending radially with respect to the axial centerline as taught by and suggested by Plant in order to modify the flow angle of air (Paragraph 0028, The modification uses the vanes of Silkowski as the vanes of Vise).
Regarding claim 2, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses wherein the turbine section is upstream of the supplemental thrust section.
Regarding claim 3, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses wherein the supplemental thrust section inlet comprises an annular supplemental thrust section inlet. (The supplemental thrust section inlet is annular)
Regarding claim 4, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses wherein the supplemental thrust section inlet comprises an inner wall (The inner wall defining Figure 3; 218) and an outer wall (The outer wall defining Figure 3; 218);
the inner wall extends circumferentially about a centerline (Figure 3; 206).
Powell does not disclose the inner wall extends radially outward towards the outer wall as the first portion of the supplemental thrust section inlet extends axially along the centerline towards the rotating detonation combustor.
However, Vise teaches wherein the rotating detonation combustor inlet comprises an inner wall and an outer wall (The top and bottom instances of Figure 7; 150, respectively);
the inner wall extends circumferentially about a centerline (Figure 12; 116); and
the inner wall extends radially outward towards the outer wall as the first portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet extends axially along the centerline towards the rotating detonation combustor.
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 Powell wherein the inner wall extends radially outward towards the outer wall as the first portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section) extends axially along the centerline towards the rotating detonation combustor as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 5, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses the supplemental thrust section inlet comprises an inner wall (The inner wall defining Figure 3; 218) and an outer wall (The outer wall defining Figure 3; 218);
the inner wall extends circumferentially about a centerline (Figure 3; 206).
Powell does not disclose the outer wall extends radially inward towards the inner wall as the first portion of the supplemental thrust section inlet extends axially along the centerline towards the rotating detonation combustor.
However, Vise teaches wherein the rotating detonation combustor inlet comprises an inner wall and an outer wall (The top and bottom instances of Figure 7; 150, centerline (Figure 12; 116);
the outer wall extends circumferentially about a centerline (Figure 12; 116); and
the outer wall extends radially inward towards the inner wall as the first portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet extends axially along the centerline towards the rotating detonation combustor.
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 Powell wherein the outer wall extends radially inward towards the inner wall as the first portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section) extends axially along the centerline towards the rotating detonation combustor as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 6, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose wherein the flow area increases as a second portion of the supplemental thrust section inlet extends away from the first portion of the supplemental thrust section inlet and towards the rotating detonation combustor.
However, Vise teaches wherein the flow area increases as a second portion (The divergent portion of Figure 7; 150) of the rotating detonation combustor inlet extends away from the first portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet and towards the rotating detonation combustor.
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 Powell wherein the flow area increases as a second portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section) extends away from the first portion of the rotating detonation combustor inlet and towards the rotating detonation combustor as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 7, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose wherein the supplemental thrust section inlet forms a convergent-divergent diffuser inlet to the supplemental thrust section.
However, Vise teaches wherein the rotating detonation combustor inlet forms a convergent-divergent diffuser inlet (The convergent-divergent inlet formed by Figure 7; 150) to the rotating detonation combustor.
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 Powell wherein rotating detonation combustor inlet (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section) forms a convergent-divergent diffuser inlet to the rotating detonation combustor (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section) as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 8, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses a variable area exhaust nozzle (Figure 2; 282. Paragraph 0100) fluidly coupled with and configured downstream of the supplemental thrust section.
Regarding claim 9, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses a combustor section (Figure 3; 205) fluidly coupled with and upstream of the turbine section; and
a bypass passage (The passage through Figure 3; 264 and 238) configured to provide gas to the supplemental thrust section that bypasses the combustor section and the turbine section (Functional Language).
Regarding claim 10, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses a compressor section (Figure 3; 250, 220. Paragraph 0089 states 250 increases the pressure of the inlet airflow so that it is a compressor) fluidly coupled with and upstream of the combustor section;
the bypass passage configured to receive the gas from the compressor section (Functional Language).
Regarding claim 11, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose a bypass passage configured to direct at least a portion of gas flowing within the duct to bypass the supplemental thrust section; and
a valve configured with the bypass passage.
However, Vise teaches a bypass passage (Figure 12; 201, 203) configured to direct at least a portion of gas (The gas flowing to Figure 12; 100) flowing within a duct (The duct through Figure 1; 104 and feeding 100) to bypass the rotating detonation combustor (Functional Language); and
a valve (Figure 12; 102) configured with the bypass passage.
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 Powell to include a bypass passage configured to direct at least a portion of gas flowing within the duct to bypass the rotating detonation combustor (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section); and a valve configured with the bypass passage as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose a bypass passage configured to direct at least a portion of gas flowing within the duct around the supplemental thrust section.
However, Vise teaches a bypass passage (Figure 12; 201, 203) configured to direct at least a portion of gas (The gas flowing to Figure 12; 100) flowing within a duct (The duct through Figure 1; 104 and feeding 100) around the rotating detonation combustor (Functional Language).
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 Powell to include a bypass passage configured to direct at least a portion of gas flowing within the duct around the rotating detonation combustor (In the context of Powell, the rotating detonation combustor is the supplemental thrust section) as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 13, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose wherein the bypass passage comprises an annular inner duct arranged inward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor.
However, Vise teaches wherein the bypass passage comprises an annular inner duct (Figure 6; 203) arranged inward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor.
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 Powell wherein the bypass passage comprises an annular inner duct arranged inward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 14, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose wherein the bypass passage further comprises an annular outer duct arranged outward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor.
However, Vise teaches wherein the bypass passage further comprises an annular outer duct (Figure 6; 201) arranged outward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor.
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 Powell wherein the bypass passage further comprises an annular outer duct arranged outward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 15, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose an inner flow regulator configured to regulate an inner flow of the gas exhausted from the turbine section into the annular inner duct, the inner flow regulator comprising one or more inner variable stator vanes.
However, Vise teaches an inner flow regulator (Figure 12; 201 for blocking 203) configured to regulate an inner flow (The inner flow of the gas) of the gas into the annular inner duct (Functional Language), the inner flow regulator comprising one or more inner variable stator vanes (Paragraph 0083).
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 Powell to include an inner flow regulator configured to regulate an inner flow of the gas (In the combined invention, the gas of Vise is the gas exhaust from the turbine in Powell) into the annular inner duct, the inner flow regulator comprising one or more inner variable stator vanes as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 16, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose wherein the bypass passage comprises an annular outer duct arranged outward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor.
However, Vise teaches wherein the bypass passage comprises an annular outer duct (Figure 6; 201) arranged outward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor.
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 Powell wherein the bypass passage comprises an annular outer duct arranged outward of and extending longitudinally along the rotating detonation combustor as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Regarding claim 17, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose an outer flow regulator configured to regulate an outer flow of the gas exhausted from the turbine section into the annular outer duct, the outer flow regulator comprising one or more outer variable stator vanes.
However, Vise teaches an outer flow regulator (Figure 12; 201 for blocking 201) configured to regulate an outer flow (The outer flow of the gas) into the annular outer duct (Functional Language), the outer flow regulator comprising one or more outer variable stator vanes (Paragraph 0083).
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 Powell to include an outer flow regulator configured to regulate an outer flow of the gas (In the combined invention, the gas of Vise is the gas exhaust from the turbine in Powell) into the annular outer duct, the outer flow regulator comprising one or more outer variable stator vanes as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, This is the same modification as claim 1).
Claim(s) 1, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski (Please note that these use a second interpretation of the prior art).
Regarding claim 1, Powell discloses an Powell discloses an assembly (Figure 3) for a turbine engine (Figure 3; 250, 220, 205, 224), comprising:
a supplemental thrust section (Figure 3; 218, 246) comprising a rotating detonation combustor (Figure 3; 274. Paragraph 0097); and
a duct (The duct forming Figure 3; 218, 246 which includes at least 270, the casing defining 254, 256, and 236) comprising a supplemental thrust section inlet (Figure 3; 218) fluidly coupled with and leading to the rotating detonation combustor, the supplemental thrust section inlet comprising a flow area (The flow area of Figure 3; 218 which is defined by the position of 270) that decreases as at least a first portion (The downstream half of Figure 3; 270. When 270 is in a partially closed position, per Paragraph 0095, the flow area decreases as the downstream half of 270 extends toward the rotating detonation combustor) of the supplemental thrust section inlet extends towards the rotating detonation combustor;
a turbine section (Figure 3; 224, 226) fluidly coupled with and upstream of the duct, the turbine section extending along an axial centerline (Figure 3; 206) of the turbine engine;
the rotating detonation combustor at an axial position at or downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet (The rotating detonation combustor is at an axial position downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet);
a flow of gas (The flow of gas exhausted from the turbine section to the supplemental thrust section) exhausted from the turbine section into the supplemental thrust section.
Powell does not disclose a flow regulator configured to regulate a flow of gas exhausted from the turbine section into the supplemental thrust section, the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes arranged circumferentially about the axial centerline, at an axial position at or downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet, and the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline;
wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis extending radially with respect to the axial centerline.
However, Powell teaches a rotating detonation combustor (Figure 12; 100),
a flow regulator (Figure 12; 210) configured to regulate a flow (The flow into the rotating detonation chamber) into the rotating detonation combustor (Functional Language), the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes (Paragraph 0083).
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 Powell to include a flow regulator configured to regulate a flow (In the context of Powell this is a flow of gas exhaust from the turbine section) into the rotating detonation combustor, the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes (In the context of Powell, the plurality of variable stator vanes are downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet because the RDC of Powell is downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet and the plurality of variable stator vanes are part of the RDC of Vise) as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to direct or block the flow into the rotating detonation combustor (Paragraph 0083, The modification uses the RDC of Vise in Powell).
Powell in view of Vise does not teach wherein the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline;
wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis extending radially with respect to the axial centerline.
However, Silkowski teaches an assembly (Figure 5) for a turbine engine (Figure 4), comprising:
a flow regulator (Figure 4; 128) configured to regulate a flow of gas (The flow of gas through Figure 4; 14, 16, 18. Functional Language, 128 regulates the flow of gas into 16 because when Figure 5; 128 is more vertical there is less flow of gas than when 128 is more horizontal) into a combustor (Figure 4; 16), the flow regulator comprising a plurality of variable stator vanes (Figure 4; 128 is a vane, Paragraph 0028, 0029) arranged circumferentially about an axial centerline (Figure 4; 24), and the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline;
wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis (The axis of Paragraph 0029) extending radially with respect to the axial centerline.
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 Powell in view of Vise wherein the plurality of variable stator vanes extending radially across the flow of gas with respect to the axial centerline; wherein each of the plurality of variable stator vanes is configured to pivot about a respective pivot axis extending radially with respect to the axial centerline as taught by and suggested by Plant in order to modify the flow angle of air (Paragraph 0028, The modification uses the vanes of Silkowski as the vanes of Vise).
Regarding claim 20, Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell further discloses wherein the axial position of the rotating detonation combustor (In the combined invention of Powell in view of Vise and Silkowski, the vanes of Vise are part of the rotating detonation combustor of Powell, so that the vanes are also downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet) is downstream of the supplemental thrust section inlet.
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powell in view of Kenworth (US 4072008).
Regarding claim 18, Powell discloses an assembly (Figure 3) for a turbine engine (Figure 3; 250, 220, 205, 224), comprising:
a supplemental thrust section (Figure 3; 218, 246) comprising a rotating detonation combustor (Figure 3; 274. Paragraph 0097);
a duct (The duct forming the flowpath through Figure 3; 244, 216, 205, 226, 218, 246) configured to direct gas along a core flowpath (The flowpath through Figure 3; 244, 216, 205, 226) into the supplemental thrust section during a first mode (Functional Language, The mode where Figure 3; 270 is open).
Powell does not disclose a bypass passage configured, during a second mode, to receive at least a portion of the gas from the duct and the core flowpath, bypass the supplemental thrust section, and rejoin the core flowpath downstream of the supplemental thrust section; and
a flow regulation system configured to selectively direct one or more portions of the gas to at least one of the supplemental thrust section or the bypass passage.
However, Kenworth teaches an assembly (Figure 10, 11) for a turbine engine (Figure 1; 10 using Figure 10 and 11), comprising:
a supplemental thrust section (Figure 1; 55);
a duct (Figure 10; 79, 124) configured to direct gas along a core flowpath (The flow path through Figure 1; 20, 30, 36, 40, 54, 55, 56) into the supplemental thrust section during a first mode (Figure 10. Column 3, lines 15-22);
a bypass passage (Figure 1; 18, 61, 59) configured, during a second mode (Figure 11. Column 3, lines 15-22), to receive at least a portion of the gas from the duct and the core flowpath (The portion of the gas through the bypass passage), bypass the supplemental thrust section, and rejoin the core flowpath downstream of the supplemental thrust section (Figure 1 has 59 rejoins the core flowpath downstream of the augmentor); and
a flow regulation system (Figure 10; 120) configured to selectively direct one or more portions of the gas to at least one of the supplemental thrust section or the bypass passage (Functional Language, Figure 10; 120 selectively directs one or more portions of the gas to at least one of the supplemental thrust section or the bypass passage).
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 Powell to include bypass passage configured, during a second mode, to receive at least a portion of the gas from the duct and the core flowpath, bypass the supplemental thrust section, and rejoin the core flowpath downstream of the supplemental thrust section; and a flow regulation system configured to selectively direct one or more portions of the gas to at least one of the supplemental thrust section or the bypass passage as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to cool air for the supplemental thrust section (Column 5, lines 23-27) and to improve operating efficiency (Column 3, lines 22-27, The modification adds the augmentor liner and flow regulation system of Kenworth to Powell).
Regarding claim 19, Powell in view of Kenworth teaches the invention as claimed.
Powell does not disclose wherein the supplemental thrust section is operational during the first mode; and
the supplemental thrust section is non-operational during the second mode.
However, Kenworth teaches wherein
the supplemental thrust section is operational during the first mode (Column 3, lines 15-22); and
the supplemental thrust section is non-operational during the second mode (Column 3, lines 15-22).
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 Powell wherein the supplemental thrust section is operational during the first mode; and the supplemental thrust section is non-operational during the second mode as taught by and suggested by Vise in order to cool air for the supplemental thrust section (Column 5, lines 23-27) and to improve operating efficiency (Column 3, lines 22-27, This is the same modification as claim 18).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that the prior art of record does not disclose, teach, or suggest a flow regulator at an axial position at or downstream of the inlet of the rotating detonation chamber. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in the two interpretations of the prior art in this OA, the prior art does disclose, teach, or suggest a flow regulator at an axial position at or downstream of the inlet of the rotating detonation chamber.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 18 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.
Haynes et al (US 20210164405 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2026) states in Paragraph 0028 that a rotating detonation combustor can be used in a supersonic propulsion system, a hypersonic propulsion system, a turbofan engine, a turboshaft engine, a turboprop engine, a turbojet engine, a ramjet engine, a scramjet engine, etc., or combinations thereof, such as combined-cycle propulsion system
Singh et al (US 20210108801 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2026) states in Paragraph 0084 that a rotating detonation combustor can be used in a supersonic propulsion system, a hypersonic propulsion system, a turbofan engine, a turboshaft engine, a turboprop engine, a turbojet engine, a ramjet engine, a scramjet engine, etc., or combinations thereof, such as combined-cycle propulsion system
Dyson et al (US 20210164660 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2026) states in Paragraph 0030 that a rotating detonation combustor can be used in a supersonic propulsion system, a hypersonic propulsion system, a turbofan engine, a turboshaft engine, a turboprop engine, a turbojet engine, a ramjet engine, a scramjet engine, etc., or combinations thereof, such as combined-cycle propulsion system
Singh et al (US 20210140641 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2026) states in Paragraph 0034 that a rotating detonation combustor can be used in a supersonic propulsion system, a hypersonic propulsion system, a turbofan engine, a turboshaft engine, a turboprop engine, a turbojet engine, a ramjet engine, a scramjet engine, etc., or combinations thereof, such as combined-cycle propulsion system
Pal et al (US 20200040843 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2026) states in Paragraph 0043 and 0044 that a similarly structured rotating detonation combustor can operate at hypersonic speeds
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
Prosecution Insights