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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment and/or arguments submitted on 02/03/20226 is/are being considered by the examiner.
Claims 1-20 are pending:
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and/or amendments, with respect to Double Patenting have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Double Patenting of record has been withdrawn.
Rejection of record overcome via amendment.
Applicant’s arguments and/or amendments, with respect to 35 USC 102 and 103 art rejections based on Hall (US 9,925,862) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 102 and 103 art rejections of record has been withdrawn.
In particular, applicant’s amendments to the independent claims overcome the application of Hall of record.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall (US 9,925,862) in view of Chen (JP 2022-57899).
Claim 1
Hall discloses:
“An extraction impeller (Fig7/8, wheel 60) for an axial compressor (Fig6, compressor 16), the extraction impeller comprising:
a body having a rotation axis and a surface perpendicular to the rotation axis (Fig7/8, body 64 of wheel 60 has central rotation axis arranged in the vertical direction with radial surfaces shown perpendicular to rotation axis); and
a plurality of first vanes having an elongated S-shape arranged on the surface (Fig7, primary blades 65), the plurality of first vanes extending radially from an outer flow inlet edge of the body to a flow outlet hub centered on the surface at the rotation axis (Fig6-8, blade 65 extension shown in the flow context of compressor 16), wherein a radially inner end of each of the plurality of first vanes connect at the flow outlet hub in a direction perpendicular to the rotation axis (Fig7-8, blades 65 radially connect to central hub 64 of wheel 60 in the radial direction), …;
wherein the flow outlet hub centered on the surface at the rotation axis has a multi-pointed star shape with each point thereof coupled to the radial inner end of a respective first vane of the plurality of first vanes (best seen Fig7, shape of blades 65 shows a multi-pointed star arrangement).”
Hall is silent to the first vane distal ends being coplanar as claimed.
Chen teaches (Fig3, impeller 1, base 3, vanes 12/11; Claim 3) that it is known in the art to form an impeller 1 to have coplanar flat airfoil surfaces 11/12 as shown by the contact between base 3 and vanes 11/12 in the shown assembled state. Chen further teaches (Background) that the impeller structure provides the advantage of improved performance while not increasing sound production.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the impeller of Hall to have coplanar distal ends of the vanes as taught by Chen, as such a modification would the advantage of improved performance while not increasing sound production, and the resulting arrangement has the reasonable expectation of successfully providing Hall with improved performance while not increasing sound production based on the modifications from Chen.
Claim 2
The modified arrangement of Hall by the teachings of Chen discloses: “The extraction impeller of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of second vanes arranged on the surface (Hall: Fig7/8, secondary blades 66), wherein at least one of the plurality of second vanes is disposed between adjacent first vanes (Hall: arrangement best seen Fig7/8).”
Claim 11
Hall discloses:
“A compressor wheel (Fig7/8, wheel 60) for an axial compressor (Fig5, compressor 16), the compressor wheel comprising:
a wheel body (Fig7/8, body 64 of wheel 60) for coupling to a rotor (Fig6, rotor shaft 42);
a plurality of rotating blades coupled to the main wheel body for compressing air flow in a compressed air passage (Fig6-8, compressor wheel 60 body 64 coupled to primary blades 65 and secondary blades 66); and
an extraction impeller coupled to the wheel body (Fig7/8, wheel 60) and in fluid communication with the compressed air passage (Fig6 shows fluid communication arrangement), the extraction impeller including:
an impeller body having a rotation axis and a surface perpendicular to the rotation axis (Fig7/8, body 64 of wheel 60 has central rotation axis arranged in the vertical direction with radial surfaces shown perpendicular to rotation axis); and
a plurality of first vanes having an elongated S-shape arranged on the surface (Fig7, primary blades 65), the plurality of first vanes extending radially from an outer flow inlet edge of the impeller body to a flow outlet hub centered on the surface at the rotation axis (Fig6-8, blade 65 extension shown in the flow context of compressor 16),
wherein a radially inner end of each of the plurality of first vanes connect at the flow outlet hub in a direction perpendicular to the rotation axis (Fig7-8, blades 65 radially connect to central hub 64 of wheel 60 in the radial direction), … , and
wherein the flow outlet hub centered on the surface at the rotation axis has a multi-pointed star shape with each point thereof coupled to the radial inner end of a respective first vane of the plurality of first vanes (best seen Fig7, shape of blades 65 shows a multi-pointed star arrangement).”
Hall is silent to the first vane distal ends being coplanar as claimed.
Chen teaches (Fig3, impeller 1, base 3, vanes 12/11; Claim 3) that it is known in the art to form an impeller 1 to have coplanar flat airfoil surfaces 11/12 as shown by the contact between base 3 and vanes 11/12 in the shown assembled state. Chen further teaches (Background) that the impeller structure provides the advantage of improved performance while not increasing sound production.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the impeller of Hall to have coplanar distal ends of the vanes as taught by Chen, as such a modification would the advantage of improved performance while not increasing sound production, and the resulting arrangement has the reasonable expectation of successfully providing Hall with improved performance while not increasing sound production based on the modifications from Chen.
Claim 12
The modified arrangement of Hall by the teachings of Chen discloses: “The compressor wheel of claim 11, further comprising a plurality of second vanes arranged on the surface (Hall: Fig7/8, secondary blades 66), wherein at least one of the plurality of second vanes is disposed between adjacent first vanes (Hall: arrangement best seen Fig7/8).”
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bintz (US 2019/0195127) in view of Hall (US 9,925,862) and Chen (JP 2022-57899)
Claim 20
Bintz discloses:
“A gas turbine system (Fig1, gas turbine 20), comprising:
an axial compressor including the compressor wheel (impeller 208 wheel, best seen Fig2) …;
a combustor (Fig1, combustor section 26) operatively coupled to the axial compressor (best seen Fig1/2, combustor 26 is coupled to impeller 208 at outlet region 108); and
a gas turbine operatively coupled to the combustor (Fig1).”
Bintz is silent to the impeller wheel having the features as claimed in claim 11.
The modified arrangement of Hall by the teachings of Chen as applied in claim 11 above teaches that it is known in the art to form an impeller with vane structure as discussed in claim 11 above. For ease of readability, please refer to the discussion in claim 11 above.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the simple substitution of the impeller structure as taught by Hall into the impeller wheel of the gas turbine of Bintz, as such a modification would merely be the simple substitution of one known in the art impeller vane structure arrangement for another, and the resulting arrangement has the reasonable expectation of successfully providing an equally well performing gas turbine with an alternative known in the art impeller wheel structural arrangement.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3-10, 13-19 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 3
The prior art of record fails to anticipate or render obvious the limitations of the claim, and in particular the limitations of claim 1+2+3 in combination.
Claim 13
The prior art of record fails to anticipate or render obvious the limitations of the claim, and in particular the limitations of claim 11+12+13 in combination.
Claims 4-10, 14-19 would be allowable over art based on dependency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN HUNTER JR whose telephone number is (571)272-5093. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-18.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571 272 9059. 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.
/JOHN S HUNTER, JR/Examiner, Art Unit 3761