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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/08/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-6 and 9 are currently being examined.
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 1-6 and 9 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.
Claim 1 recites “has a first contact angle smaller than 90 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel, and wherein the first contact angle is 10 degrees or less” which is unclear as to which range of contact angle is being claimed which renders claim 1 as indefinite. For current examination purposes, the recitation is interpreted as: has a first contact angle with respect to the liquid fuel, and wherein the first contact angle is 10 degrees or less.
Claims dependent upon claim 1 are also rejected as being indefinite for the same reason as claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Varanasi et al. 20090283611.
Regarding independent claim 1, as best understood, Varanasi discloses, (with reference to Figs. 1-3, 4B and 5), an aircraft engine combustor ([0022] describes airplane engines and gas turbine engines with a combustor; [0024] describes Fig. 1 showing a gas turbine fuel injector 10 with atomizer 12 of a combustor) comprising:
a tubular member (28) that has a tubular shape (28 has a tubular shape) and defines an internal space (labeled in annotated Fig. 1) extending along an axis (49 which is an axis of symmetry per [0024]); and
a fuel nozzle (20) that is disposed such that at least a portion of the fuel nozzle is located within the internal space (at least a portion of 20 is located in internal space), the fuel nozzle having a jetting hole from which liquid fuel is jetted ([0025] describes fuel nozzle 20 injects fuel to discharge side 24 which includes discharge nozzle 28, i.e., tubular member 28, such that at least one jetting hole is necessary for injecting, i.e., jetting, fuel) toward an inner peripheral surface (27 labeled in annotated Fig. 1; 27 is inner peripheral surface of 28 and a liquid film of fuel begins forming on 27 per [0032] such that fuel is jetted toward 27) of the tubular member,
wherein the tubular member is configured such that an entire distal end surface (entire distal end surface of lip 29) in a circumferential direction (circumferential direction about axis 49) extending from an outlet end (labeled in annotated Fig. 1) of the inner peripheral surface toward an outside in a radial direction (entire distal end surface of lip 29 extends from outlet end of 27 in a radial outward direction with respect to axis 49) has a first contact angle smaller than 90 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel, and wherein the first contact angle is 10 degrees or less (see 112(b): interpreted as: has a first contact angle with respect to the liquid fuel, and wherein the first contact angle is 10 degrees or less:
[0031] describes as liquid fuel exits the pilot fuel nozzle 20, part of the fuel spreads into a film on surfaces of atomizer 12 which are flat surfaces such as the inner surface of the pilot splitter 28 or the nozzle lip 29, can collect a thin film of the fuel and are sometimes known as "pre-filming" surfaces, and by enhancing the wettability of the prefilming surfaces using hydrophilic or superhydrophilic surface treatments, a thinner, more uniform fuel film can form on the surfaces, which can lead to better atomization through finer mean droplet size;
[0034] describes a contact angle formed between the surface and a tangent to a surface of a droplet of a reference liquid at the point of contact between the surface and the droplet is a measure of liquid wettability of a surface, such that the entire distal end surface has a first contact angle with respect to the liquid fuel;
[0037] describes surface 110 in Figs. 2-3 can be any of the surfaces where pre-filming would be desirable and can comprise coating layer 112 and
[0040] describes surface 110 can comprise a plurality of surface features 120, as shown in FIG. 3; the size, shape, and orientation of features 120 have a strong effect on the wettability of surface 110;
per [0041] in the "Wenzel" state, depicted in FIG. 4(b), drop 200 wets the entire surface 210, filling the spaces between the peaks 212 with liquid;
per [0042] the particular state adopted by the drop on the surface depends on the overall energy of the solid/liquid/vapor system, which in turn is a function of the geometric characteristics--such as the size, shape, and orientation--of the surface roughness features of the solid;
[0043] shows equation (1) for effective contact angle θ* of a Wenzel drop (w) with “r” as a texture parameter defined by equation (3) where "a" is the width of the posts, "b" is the edge-to-edge spacing between the posts, and "h" is the height of the posts;
per [0044] the effective contact angle on textured surfaces is strongly influenced by parameters such as texture feature size, spacing, and aspect ratio and texturing a surface to produce a Wenzel state droplet is critical to forming a superhydrophilic surface, and FIG. 5 is a graph showing the relationship between effective contact angle, θ*w, for the Wenzel drop and the texture parameter, r, and the graph shows a significant reduction in effective contact angle (as low as 0 degrees) can be achieved in the case of a Wenzel drop when a hydrophilic surface, i.e., a surface with a nominal contact angle of less than 90 degrees, is textured to have surface features, and as the texture of the surface features becomes denser (rougher), the value of r increases and the effective contact angle is advantageously lowered such that when an article, such as tubular member 28 and lip 29, has an existing hydrophilic surface, such as most metal surfaces, or the surface has been coated with a hydrophilic surface coating, the surface can be appropriately textured by choosing the texture parameter (r) that results in the desired low or zero effective contact angle by achieving a Wenzel state;
per [0049], depending on the application of the atomizer, surface 110 in Fig. 3 can comprise titanium oxide;
per [0050] specific ranges and combinations of the surface feature parameters described in [0045]-[0048] can provide a regime in which the effective wettability of surface 110 may be driven to generate an effective contact angle of less than about 10 degrees with a drop of the reference liquid which provides an ultra thin liquid film to form on the surface which will result in finer mean drop size and enhanced atomization).
PNG
media_image1.png
629
631
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Varanasi further discloses an outlet end portion of the inner peripheral surface including the outlet end (outlet end portion of inner peripheral surface 27 is axially downstream portion of 27 including the outlet end of 27 in Fig. 1 is a pre-filming surface per [0032]) is configured to have a second contact angle smaller than 90 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel (per claims 1 and 4 of Varanasi, a pre-filming surface can be configured to have an effective contact angle with reference to the atomized liquid of less than 30 degrees, such that a second contact angle is less than 30 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel which is smaller than 90 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel as claimed).
Regarding claim 3, Varanasi further discloses the first contact angle is smaller than the second contact angle (a first contact angle being 10 degrees or less is smaller than any second contact angle which is between 10 and 30 degrees).
Regarding claim 4, Varanasi further discloses a second tubular member (40 Fig. 1) that has a tubular shape (40 has a tubular shape), surrounds the outlet end of the inner peripheral surface from the outside in the radial direction (40 surrounds the outlet end of 27 radially outward of 27, i.e., from the outside in the radial direction, in Fig. 1), and has a second inner peripheral surface (labeled in annotated Fig. 1) including a second outlet end (labeled in annotated Fig. 1) positioned on a side opposite to an internal space side across the outlet end of the inner peripheral surface in a direction in which the axis extends (second outlet end is positioned on a downstream axial side opposite to upstream axial side, i.e., internal space side, across outlet end of 27 in axial direction in which axis 49 extends in annotated Fig. 1),
wherein the second tubular member is configured such that an entire second distal end surface (entire second distal end surface of 71 in Fig. 1) in the circumferential direction (circumferential direction around 49) extending from the second outlet end of the second inner peripheral surface toward the outside in the radial direction (in a radial outward direction with respect to axis 49) has a third contact angle smaller than 90 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel (entire second distal end surface of 71 is a pre-filming surface per [0032] and per claims 1 and 4 of Varanasi, a pre-filming surface can be configured to have an effective contact angle with reference to the atomized liquid of less than 30 degrees, such that a second contact angle is less than 30 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel which is smaller than 90 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel as claimed).
PNG
media_image2.png
629
729
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Varanasi further discloses a second outlet end portion (labeled in annotated Fig. 1) of the second inner peripheral surface including the second outlet end is configured to have a fourth contact angle smaller than 90 degrees with the liquid fuel (second outlet end portion of second inner peripheral surface of 40 including second outlet end in annotated Fig. 1 is a pre-filming surface per [0032] and per claims 1 and 4 of Varanasi, a pre-filming surface can be configured to have an effective contact angle with reference to the atomized liquid of less than 30 degrees, such that a second contact angle is less than 30 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel which is smaller than 90 degrees with respect to the liquid fuel as claimed).
Regarding claim 6, Varanasi further discloses the third contact angle is smaller than the first contact angle (the third contact angle that is 5 degrees is smaller than the first contact angle that is 10 degrees).
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.
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) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Varanasi et al. 20090283611 in view of Ukropec et al. 20150021417.
Regarding claim 9, Varanasi further discloses the distal end surface is coated with a titanium oxide coating (per [0038] coating layer 112 of surface 110 comprises titanium oxide) but is silent regarding the titanium oxide coating is a photocatalytic titanium oxide coating.
Ukropec teaches a fuel injector for an internal combustion engine has a surface of the fuel injector coated around an injection hole with photocatalytic titanium oxide to prevent deposits from forming on the fuel injector per [0013].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Varanasi to have the distal end surface coated with a lipophilic film, the lipophilic film being a glass coating or a photocatalytic titanium oxide coating as taught by Ukropec to use the photocatalytic titanium oxide coating to prevent deposits from forming on the distal end.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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. As discussed above, the amendment to claim 1 causes a 112(b) rejection.
The current prior art rejection of claim 1, as best understood, is a 102 rejection over Varanasi et al. 20090283611 which discloses “a first contact angle is 10 degrees or less.” The current rejection does not rely on the teachings of hydrophobic alternated with hydrophilic regions which Applicant has cited in Remarks. Varanasi ‘611 also discloses surface treatments of pre-filming surfaces including lip regions of the pre-filming surfaces which result in a contact angle across an entire surface (see Fig. 4B; [0031] describes “flat surfaces, for example the inner surface of the pilot splitter or the nozzle lip, can collect a thin film of the fuel and are sometimes known as "pre-filming" surfaces” and per [0037] surface 110 could be any surface where pre-filming is desirable).
Applicant does not argue the dependent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSON JOAN HARRINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2359. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5 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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at (571) 270-5426. 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.
/A.J.H./ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741 Examiner, Art Unit 3741
