Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/084,526

ADDITIVELY MANUFACTURED COMBUSTOR BODY WITH RESONATING TUBE

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Mar 19, 2025
Examiner
WALTHOUR, SCOTT J
Art Unit
3741
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
GE Infrastructure Technology LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
505 granted / 644 resolved
+8.4% vs TC avg
Strong +69% interview lift
Without
With
+69.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
664
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§102
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
§112
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 644 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Response to Amendment This Office action is responsive to the amendment filed 12/24/2025 for application 19084526. Claims 8 & 17 are canceled by Applicant. Claims 19-20 are newly presented by Applicant. Claims 1-7, 9-16, & 18-20 are pending. Claims 4, 6-7, 13, & 15-16 are withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-3, 5, 9-12, 14 & 18-20 are examined below. Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: claims 1 & 10 recite a flow sleeve as part of the one-piece member, however the specification does not refer to a flow sleeve for the AM combustor body without a separate flow sleeve (rather, the specification refers to annulus 275 being formed in the combustion liner 208 itself as opposed to being formed between the liner 108 and a flow sleeve 110). 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. Claims 9 & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Regarding Dependent Claims 19 & 20, the recitations “the resonating tube includes a resonating chamber disposed on an outside of the annulus, Dependent Claims 9 & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for their dependence from claims 19 & 20, respectively. 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. 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, 9-12, & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benz 20040248053 in view of Gralki 20230033194. Regarding Independent Claim 1, Benz teaches a combustor (Figs. 1 & 4) for a gas turbine system, the combustor comprising: a combustor body including: a combustion liner (21) defining a combustion chamber (1) and including a forward portion (cylindrical portion at upstream end in Fig. 4) and a tapered transition portion extending from the forward portion (tapered transition portion at downstream end in Fig. 4); a flow sleeve surrounding at least part of the combustion liner (22); an annulus defined between the combustion liner and the flow sleeve (annulus 3 surrounding 21); and a resonating tube (as follows) configured to dampen acoustic pressure oscillations of combustion gases in the combustor (para. [0042]), the resonating tube including a body (4) defining a resonating chamber (5) and a resonating tube neck (6) having a first end in fluid communication with the resonating chamber (first end of 6 in communication with 5) and a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber (second end of 6 in fluid communication with 1); wherein the combustor body includes one or more side walls of the resonating tube body extending outwardly from the flow sleeve (side walls of 4 extending outwardly from 22). Benz fails to expressly teach the combustor body is additively manufactured as a one-piece member, the one-piece member including a plurality of parallel, sintered metal layers that form parts of the one-piece member. Gralki teaches a combustor Fig. 1 with a complex combustor body having multiple walls with resonators positioned between them (Fig. 3, walls 20’, 30’, resonators 4’ with necks 28’ and supports 10’), the combustor body with multiple walls and resonators being additively manufactured as a one-piece member with a plurality of parallel, sintered metal layers (paras. [0010]-[0011] & [0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Benz’s combustor such that the combustor body is additively manufactured as a one-piece member, the one-piece member including a plurality of parallel, sintered metal layers that form parts of the one-piece member, as taught by Benz, in order to replace welds in a typical combustor having resonators and to lower costs (Gralki; paras. [0019]-[0020]). Regarding Dependent Claim 2, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Benz further teaches a radially inner wall of the resonating tube body that is integral with the flow sleeve defining the annulus and the one or more side walls of the resonating tube body (radially inner wall of resonator body is portion of flow sleeve 22, which defines the annulus in combination with liner 21 and which is integral with the one or more side walls 4 for the reasons discussed in the modification of Benz with Gralki for claim 1 above). Regarding Dependent Claim 3, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 2, and Benz further teaches the resonating tube neck extends in a radial direction through the annulus (6 extends radially through 3). Regarding Dependent Claim 9, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 19, and Benz further teaches the resonating tube and each of the at least one additional resonating tube are configured to dampen different frequencies (for interpretation 1 from claim 19 below: the circumferentially-arranged resonating tubes are particularly efficient at damping a particular frequency, but are capable of damping other frequencies close to the target frequency as well, even if less effectively than the target frequency; for interpretation 2 from claim 19 below: the two resonating tubes, the “middle” resonator and downstream resonator each shown in Fig. 4, target two different frequencies shown at f1 and f2, respectively). Regarding Independent Claim 10, Benz teaches a gas turbine (GT) system (para. [0005]), comprising: a compressor section (compressed combustion feed air; para. [0004]); a combustion section (Figs. 1 & 4) operatively coupled to the compressor section; and a turbine section (inherent to a “gas turbine” as disclosed) operatively coupled to the combustion section; wherein the combustion section includes at least one combustor (Fig. 4) including a combustor body (as follows) including: a combustion liner (21) defining a combustion chamber (1) and including a forward portion (cylindrical portion at upstream end in Fig. 4) and a tapered transition portion extending from the forward portion (tapered transition portion at downstream end in Fig. 4); a flow sleeve surrounding at least part of the combustion liner (22); an annulus defined between the combustion liner and the flow sleeve (annulus 3 surrounding 21); and a resonating tube (as follows) configured to dampen acoustic pressure oscillations of combustion gases in the combustor (para. [0042]), the resonating tube including a body (4) defining a resonating chamber (5) and a resonating tube neck (6) having a first end in fluid communication with the resonating chamber (first end of 6 in communication with 5) and a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber (second end of 6 in fluid communication with 1); wherein the combustor body includes one or more side walls of the resonating tube body extending outwardly away from the flow sleeve (side walls of 4 extend outwardly away from 22). Benz fails to expressly teach the combustor body is additively manufactured as a one-piece member, the one-piece member including a plurality of parallel, sintered metal layers that form parts of the one-piece member. Gralki teaches a combustor Fig. 1 with a complex combustor body having multiple walls with resonators positioned between them (Fig. 3, walls 20’, 30’, resonators 4’ with necks 28’ and supports 10’), the combustor body with multiple walls and resonators being additively manufactured as a one-piece member with a plurality of parallel, sintered metal layers (paras. [0010]-[0011] & [0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Benz’s combustor such that the combustor body is additively manufactured as a one-piece member, the one-piece member including a plurality of parallel, sintered metal layers that form parts of the one-piece member, as taught by Benz, in order to replace welds in a typical combustor having resonators and to lower costs (Gralki; paras. [0019]-[0020]). Regarding Dependent Claim 11, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 10, and Benz further teaches a radially inner wall of the resonating tube body that is integral with the flow sleeve defining the annulus and the one or more side walls of the resonating tube body (radially inner wall of resonator body is portion of flow sleeve 22, which defines the annulus in combination with liner 21 and which is integral with the one or more side walls 4 for the reasons discussed in the modification of Benz with Gralki for claim 10 above). Regarding Dependent Claim 12, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Benz further teaches the resonating tube neck extends in a radial direction through the annulus (6 extends radially through 3). Regarding Dependent Claim 18, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 20, and Benz further teaches the resonating tube and each of the at least one additional resonating tube are configured to dampen different frequencies (for interpretation 1 from claim 20 below: the circumferentially-arranged resonating tubes are particularly efficient at damping a particular frequency, but are capable of damping other frequencies close to the target frequency as well, even if less effectively than the target frequency; for interpretation 2 from claim 20 below: the two resonating tubes, the “middle” resonator and downstream resonator each shown in Fig. 4, target two different frequencies shown at f1 and f2, respectively). Regarding Dependent Claim 19, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Benz further teaches the resonating tube includes a resonating chamber disposed on an outside of the annulus (chamber 5 outside of annulus 3), wherein the combustor further comprises at least one additional resonating tube (interpretation 1: circumferentially arranged resonating tubes, see Fig. 2c; interpretation 2: axially arranged resonating tubes at transition portion in Fig. 4, includes the “middle” resonator shown and the downstream resonator), and wherein each of the at least one additional resonating tube includes a respective resonating chamber (respective chamber 5) and a respective resonating tube neck (respective neck 6) with a first end in fluid communication with the resonating chamber (first end in fluid communication with 5), and one of: (a) the resonating chamber is disposed on the outside of the annulus surrounding at least part of the combustion liner, and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the annulus; (b) (for interpretations 1 & 2) the resonating chamber (5) disposed on the outside of the annulus (outside of 3), and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber defined by the combustion liner (end of 6 in fluid communication with 1); (c) the resonating chamber is disposed within the annulus, and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber; (d) the resonating chamber is spaced outside of the annulus by the resonating tube neck, and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the annulus; (e) the resonating chamber is disposed on an outside of one of the tapered transition portion and an impingement flow sleeve surrounding the tapered transition portion; wherein the tapered transition portion includes an aft frame at an aft end of the tapered transition portion, and the resonating chamber is adjacent to the aft frame; and wherein an impingement annulus is defined between the tapered transition portion and the impingement flow sleeve, and the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber; (f) the resonating chamber is at least partially disposed within the aft frame, and the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber; or (g) the resonating chamber is disposed on an outside of the impingement annulus, and the resonating tube neck has a second end in fluid communication with the impingement annulus. Note that options (a)-(g) are recited in the alternative and thus only one of the recited options is required. Regarding Dependent Claim 20, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 10, and Benz further teaches the resonating tube includes a resonating chamber disposed on an outside of the annulus (5 disposed on an outside of 3), wherein the combustor further comprises at least one additional resonating tube (interpretation 1: circumferentially arranged resonating tubes, see Fig. 2c; interpretation 2: axially arranged resonating tubes at transition portion in Fig. 4, includes the “middle” resonator shown and the downstream resonator), and wherein each of the at least one additional resonating tube includes a respective resonating chamber (respective chamber 5) and a respective resonating tube neck (respective neck 6) with a first end in fluid communication with the resonating chamber (first end in fluid communication with 5), and one of: (a) the resonating chamber is disposed on the outside of the annulus surrounding at least part of the combustion liner, and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the annulus; (b) (for interpretations 1 & 2) the resonating chamber (5) disposed on the outside of the annulus (outside of 3), and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber defined by the combustion liner (end of 6 in fluid communication with 1); (c) the resonating chamber is disposed within the annulus, and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber; (d) the resonating chamber is spaced outside of the annulus by the resonating tube neck, and wherein the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the annulus; (e) the resonating chamber is disposed on an outside of one of the tapered transition portion and an impingement flow sleeve surrounding the tapered transition portion; wherein the tapered transition portion includes an aft frame at an aft end of the tapered transition portion, and the resonating chamber is adjacent to the aft frame; and wherein an impingement annulus is defined between the tapered transition portion and the impingement flow sleeve, and the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber; (f) the resonating chamber is at least partially disposed within the aft frame, and the resonating tube neck includes a second end in fluid communication with the combustion chamber; or (g) the resonating chamber is disposed on an outside of the impingement annulus, and the resonating tube neck has a second end in fluid communication with the impingement annulus. Note that options (a)-(g) are recited in the alternative and thus only one of the recited options is required. Claims 5 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benz in view of Gralki, as applied to claims 1 & 10 above, respectively, and further in view of Dicintio 20180100436. Regarding Dependent Claim 5, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Benz further teaches the combustor body includes an aft end of the tapered transition portion and the flow sleeve surrounding at least part of the combustion liner surrounds the tapered transition portion (22 surrounds the liner 21 and the tapered transition portion at the downstream end in Fig. 4), wherein the resonating chamber is on an outside of the impingement flow sleeve (on an outside of 22), wherein the annulus is an impingement annulus defined between the impingement flow sleeve and the tapered transition portion of the combustion liner (3 defined between 22 and 21), and wherein a radially inner wall of the resonating tube body is integral with a wall of the impingement annulus and the one or more side walls of the resonating tube body (radially inner wall of resonating tube body is portion of 22, which is a wall of the impingement annulus 3, and is thus integral with 22 and the one or more side walls 4 for the reasons discussed for claim 1 above). Benz further teaches admitting air into the annulus for cooling (para. [0033]). Benz in view of Gralki fails to teach an aft frame and the flow sleeve surrounding at least part of the combustion liner is an impingement flow sleeve. Dicintio teaches a combustor for a gas turbine (Figs. 1-2), the combustor including an aft frame (100) a flow sleeve or an impingement sleeve (42) and an annulus (44) defined between the sleeve and a liner (38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Benz’s combustor to include an aft frame and such that the flow sleeve is an impingement flow sleeve, as taught by Dicintio, in order to reinforce the shape of the aft end of the duct and for mounting the duct to a support structure and in order to provide impingement cooling and airflow to the annulus (Dicintio, paras. [0003] & [0024]; and Benz, para. [0033]). Regarding Dependent Claim 14, Benz in view of Gralki teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 10, and Benz further teaches the combustor body includes an aft end of the tapered transition portion and the flow sleeve surrounding at least part of the combustion liner surrounds the tapered transition portion (22 surrounds the liner 21 and the tapered transition portion at the downstream end in Fig. 4), wherein the resonating chamber is on an outside of the impingement flow sleeve (on an outside of 22), wherein the annulus is an impingement annulus defined between the impingement flow sleeve and the tapered transition portion of the combustion liner (3 defined between 22 and 21), and wherein a radially inner wall of the resonating tube body is integral with a wall of the impingement annulus and the one or more side walls of the resonating tube body (radially inner wall of resonating tube body is portion of 22, which is a wall of the impingement annulus 3, and is thus integral with 22 and the one or more side walls 4 for the reasons discussed for claim 1 above). Benz further teaches admitting air into the annulus for cooling (para. [0033]). Benz in view of Gralki fails to teach an aft frame and the flow sleeve surrounding at least part of the combustion liner is an impingement flow sleeve. Dicintio teaches a combustor for a gas turbine (Figs. 1-2), the combustor including an aft frame (100) a flow sleeve or an impingement sleeve (42) and an annulus (44) defined between the sleeve and a liner (38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Benz’s combustor to include an aft frame and such that the flow sleeve is an impingement flow sleeve, as taught by Dicintio, in order to reinforce the shape of the aft end of the duct and for mounting the duct to a support structure and in order to provide impingement cooling and airflow to the annulus (Dicintio, paras. [0003] & [0024]; and Benz, para. [0033]). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/24/2025 have been fully considered and they are persuasive in part and unpersuasive in part. Applicant’s arguments concerning the rejections over Uskert are persuasive in view of Applicant’s amendments to the claims. Applicant’s argument (pp. 15-16 of Remarks), concerning the rejections over Benz in view of Gralko, that Benz teaches away from the proposed combination with Gralki because Benz teaches that the third wall surfaces 4 are preferably elastic whereas the combination with Gralki would render these surfaces inelastic and thus would destroy and/or render Benz unsuitable for its intended purpose is unpersuasive. Benz does teach that the third wall surface being elastic is advantageous, as Applicant correctly points out. This, however, is not disclosed by Benz as required. Notably, Benz’s claims included a single dependent claim (claim 10) directed to the third wall surface part being elastic, despite the third wall surface part being recited in independent claim 1, and claim 10 was not dependent from any other dependent claim. In other words, Benz clearly envisioned many embodiments in which the third wall surface part did not have to be elastic at all. Thus the proposed combination of Benz with Gralki would not have destroyed or rendered Benz unsuitable for its intended purpose as one of ordinary skill in the art, choosing to additively manufacture Benz to lower costs, would simply have used one of Benz’s many embodiments that do not require the elastic third wall surface part to begin with. Conclusion 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT J WALTHOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-4999. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10 a.m.-6 p.m. Eastern. 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. /SCOTT J WALTHOUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 19, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 24, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601486
HYDROGEN FUELLED GAS TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601493
COMBUSTORS AND METHODS OF MITIGATING THERMOACOUSTIC INSTABILITIES IN A GAS FLOW
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595768
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONFIGURING OPERATION OF AN ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595751
JET-PROPELLED ENGINE USING DISCHARGED EXHAUST GAS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595910
COMBUSTION LINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+69.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 644 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month