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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/05/2026 has been entered on 05/20/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 3-4 are objected to because of the following informalities.
Regarding claims 1 and 3-4, term “the flow path” is believed to be in error for - - the tubular flow path - -
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, 3-4, and 7-8 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.
Regarding claim 1 and its dependents, it is unclear whether the claimed projection area and the claimed protruding portion refers to i) the same component/portion of the at least one fuel nozzle, or ii) two different components/portions of the at least one fuel nozzle.
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, 3-4, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barkowski 20100323309 in view of Baumann 20170198914.
Regarding claim 1, Barkowski teaches the invention as claimed: A burner assembly (1, Fig. 1), comprising a plurality of burners (2s) for mixing fuel (17) and air (10, see Fig. 9 and [0054 and 0060]),
wherein each of the plurality of burners (each 2) includes:
at least one fuel nozzle (20) for injecting the fuel (17, see Fig. 9); and
a tubular flow path (a tubular flow path having inlet 8 and outlet 9 as show in Fig. 9 and having a tubular shape as shown in Fig. 1) forming a mixing passage (annotated Fig. 9) into which the fuel (17) injected from the at least one fuel nozzle (20) and the air (10) are introduced from an inlet (8) of the flow path (per [0021], the nozzle 20 may be disposed immediately upstream from the inlet 8 in Fig. 9 as demonstrated in annotated Fig. 9),
wherein, in an axial view of the mixing passage from an upstream side of the mixing passage (interpreted as an axially side of the mixing passage in the cross-sectional view as marked in annotated Fig. 9), the at least one fuel nozzle (20) for supplying the fuel (17) to the mixing passage (annotated Fig. 9) is disposed around the periphery (an inner periphery, see annotated Fig. 9) of the flow path (the tubular flow path having inlet 8 and outlet 9 as show in Fig. 9) so that a projection area (the at least one fuel nozzle 20 has a body that is radially projected from stem 19, see annotated Fig. 9) of the at least one fuel nozzle (20) does not overlap with the mixing passage (because in the cross-sectional view as shown in Fig. 9, i) the fuel nozzle 20 per [0021] is located immediately upstream from inlet 8 of the flow path as demonstrated in annotated Fig. 9, i.e., the body of the at least one fuel nozzle does not overlap with mixing passage in the axial direction; and ii) the body of the fuel nozzle 20 demonstrated in annotated Fig. 8 does not overlap with a portion of the mixing passage in the radial direction relative to the center axis 5, see annotated Fig. 9),
wherein the at least one fuel nozzle (20) includes a protruding portion (interpreted as “the projection area”, which is the body of 20 in annotated Fig. 9) protruding upstream (because the body of 20 has an axial height) of the inlet (8) of the flow path in a flow direction of the air (flow direction of 10, see Fig. 9) and at least one fuel injection hole (where fuel 17 is injected from 20).
PNG
media_image1.png
612
966
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Barkowski does not teach at least one fuel injection hole formed on a side surface of the protruding portion, and wherein a top surface of the protruding portion, which is the upstream end surface of the protruding portion in the flow direction of the air, includes a convex curved surface.
However, Baumann teaches at least one fuel nozzle (42, see Figs. 13B and 14G) includes a protruding portion (the body of 42, see Figs. 13B and 14G) protruding upstream (because the body of 42 has an axial height, see Fig. 14G) in a flow direction of the air (flow direction of 20, see Fig. 14G) and at least
one fuel injection hole (4) formed on a side surface (a bottom side surface, see annotated Fig. 14G) of the protruding portion (the body of 42), and wherein a top surface (annotated Fig. 14G) of the protruding portion (the body of 42), which is the upstream end surface of the protruding portion in the flow direction of the air (the flow direction of 20, see Fig. 14G), includes a convex curved surface (at the rounding corner of the top surface, see annotated Fig. 14G and [0081]).
PNG
media_image2.png
452
686
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Barkowski with Baumann’s protruding portion, such that
at least one fuel injection hole formed on a side surface of the protruding portion, and wherein a top surface of the protruding portion, which is the upstream end surface of the protruding portion in the flow direction of the air, includes a convex curved surface (the modification is to modify the shape of Barkowski’s protruding portion to the shape of Baumann’s protruding portion)
in order to intensify and improve mixing effect based on high turbulence by injecting fuel into the vortices substantially tangentially with respect to the vortex street (Baumann, [0082 and 0011]).
Regarding claim 3, Barkowski further teaches wherein the plurality of burners includes a first burner (annotated Fig. 1), and a second burner (annotated Fig. 1) having the mixing passage (formed by the flow path having inlet 8 and outlet 9, see Fig. 9) that is closest to the mixing passage of the first burner (because the first burner and the second burner are located adjacent to each other without additional burner disposed therebetween, see annotated Figs. 1 and 9),
wherein a flow path wall (the portion of housing 6 forming the first burner) forming the flow path (having inlet 8 and outlet 9 as shown in Fig. 9) of the first burner (see annotated Figs. 1 and 9) and a flow path wall (the portion of housing 6 forming the second burner) forming the flow path (having inlet 8 and outlet 9 as shown in Fig. 9) of the second burner (see annotated Figs. 1 and 9) share a partition portion (annotated Figs. 1 and 9) that separates the mixing passage of the first burner from the mixing passage of the second burner (see annotated Figs. 1 and 9), and
wherein a thickness (annotated Fig. 9) of the partition portion decreases (see annotated Fig. 9) upstream in the flow direction of the air (the flow direction of 10) in an upstream end portion (the largened portion in annotated Fig. 9) of the partition portion in the flow direction of the air (see annotated Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image3.png
463
730
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
745
1173
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Barkowski further teaches wherein, when a cross-section (C-C, see annotated Fig. 1) of the partition portion (annotated Figs. 1 and 9) passing through a center (annotated Fig. 1) of the inlet (8) of the flow path (having inlet 8 and outlet 9, see Fig. 9) of the first burner (annotated Figs. 1 and 9) and a center (annotated Fig. 1) of the inlet (8) of the flow path (having inlet 8 and outlet 9, see Fig. 9) of the second burner (annotated Figs. 1 and 9) and taken along a central axis (annotated Fig. 9) of the flow path of the first burner (annotated Fig. 9) is defined as a first cross-section (the C-C taken as shown in annotated Fig. 1 results a cross-sectional view as shown in annotated Fig. 9), an upstream end surface (which is the upstream end surface of the largened portion in annotated Fig. 9) of the partition portion in the flow direction of the air (direction of 10) includes a convex curved line (annotated Fig. 9) in the first cross-section (the cross-sectional view as shown in annotated Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image5.png
495
760
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
763
1040
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Barkowski further teaches a gas turbine combustor (having combustion chamber 18, see Fig. 9 and [0039]), comprising: the burner assembly (1, Fig. 1), a combustion liner (a combustion liner is required to form the combustion chamber 18 in Fig. 9 and [0039]) forming a space (combustion chamber 18) in which a flame is formed downstream of the burner assembly (1 in Fig. 1, also see [0039 and 0065]).
Regarding claim 8, Barkowski further teaches a gas turbine (per [0024], burner assembly 1 is in a gas turbine), comprising: a compressor (in order to provide compressed air 10 to burners 2, see Fig. 9 and [0040]); a gas turbine combustor (having combustion chamber 18, see Fig. 9 and [0039]) configured to be supplied with air (the compressed air 10) compressed by the compressor and fuel (17), and produce a combustion gas by combusting the fuel (in order to drive the turbine of the gas turbine, see [0024]); and a turbine (of the gas turbine per [0024]) driven by the combustion gas produced by the gas turbine combustor (having combustion chamber 18, see Fig. 9 and [0039]), wherein the gas turbine combustor is the gas turbine combustor (having combustion chamber 18, see Fig. 9 and [0039]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 5-6 are allowed.
REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE
Regarding claim 2, the prior arts of record itself or in combination does not teach in combination with the other limitations of claim 2, “… wherein the plurality of burners includes a first burner, and a second burner having the mixing passage that is closest to the mixing passage of the first burner, wherein the mixing passage of the first burner and the mixing passage of the second burner are separated by a partition portion, wherein, in an axial view of the mixing passage from an upstream side of the mixing passage, the at least one fuel nozzle for supplying the fuel to the mixing passage is disposed radially outward of the mixing passage, wherein the at least one fuel nozzle includes a protruding portion protruding upstream of the inlet of the flow path in a flow direction of the air, …”, which requires the at least one fuel nozzle of each of the plurality of burners locate axially beyond and radially outward from the inlet of the mixing passage of the respective burner of the plurality of burners.
Regarding claim 5, the prior arts of record itself or in combination does not teach in combination with the other limitations of claim 5, “… wherein the protruding portion of the first fuel nozzle is disposed adjacent to the partition portion, wherein the protruding portion of the second fuel nozzle is disposed adjacent to the partition portion on an opposite side of a plane including the first cross-section from the protruding portion of the first fuel nozzle, and wherein a height of the partition portion increases as approaching the protruding portion of the first fuel nozzle from the first cross-section”, which requires the partition portion disposed between the protruding portion of the first fuel nozzle of the first burner and the protruding portion of the second fuel nozzle of the first burner has a concave shape in a cross-section that is perpendicular to the claimed first cross-section.
Claim 6 is allowable because claim 6 depends on the allowable independent claim 5.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/05/2026 and entered 05/20/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, on pp. 8-9, “…However, it is first noted that the fuel nozzle 20 of Barkowski is a component that is interposed inside the region through which the air flow passes. … However, Applicant respectfully submits that this is interpretation of Barkowski is incorrect because it treats the positional relationship of the objects as a mere deviation of their center points. In this regard, Applicant notes that even if the nozzle body of Barkowski is offset from the center, the nozzle body is still physically interposed within the air inflow path (projection plane) toward the inlet of the flow path”.
Examiner does not agree because:
i) Barkowski teaches the fuel nozzle as claimed, “in an axial view of the mixing passage from an upstream side of the mixing passage, the at least one fuel nozzle for supply the fuel to the mixing passage is disposed around the periphery of the flow path so that a projection area of the at least one fuel nozzle does not overlap with the mixing passage”, which is interpreted as: in the axial upstream side of the cross-section view as shown in Barkowski’s Fig. 9, Barkowski’s at least one fuel nozzle 20 per [0021] is located immediately upstream from the inlet 8 of the flow path, and thus, the body of the at least one fuel nozzle 20 does not overlap with mixing passage in the axial direction; and the body of the at least one fuel nozzle 20 is located radially offset from the portion of the mixing passage as demonstrated in annotated Fig. 9, i.e., the body of the at least one fuel nozzle 20 does not overlap with the portion of mixing passage in the radial direction;
ii) the claim language does not require the fuel nozzle a) is disposed outside of the region through which air flow passes and b) is disposed in order to not overlap with the entire mixing passage; and
iii) it is noted, “Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims”, in this case, the certain features that Applicant argues that the reference fails to teach is not claimed in the rejected claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JINGCHEN LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-6639. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-4:30.
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.
/JINGCHEN LIU/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights