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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of A-II, B-I, C-I, D-II, E-I, and F-I in the reply filed on June 1, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 6, 9-10, 17, and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 1, 2026.
Claim Interpretation
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 1-5, 7-8, 11-16, and 18-19 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, “this second circuit being connected to at least one annular heating channel which is independent of said supply channel and which extends around the space and in line with one of the sealing segments”. The annular heating channel is a functional limitation as it requires that an annular channel provides some sort of heating. The claim does not specify if the channel itself is being heated or whether something is being heated in the channel or by the channel. There is no structural details recited of fins or other structures associated with and optimized for heat transfer. There are no structural details or elements which add heat / energy to a system such as resistive heaters. All physical systems will have some degree of heat transfer between the elements unless all the elements are at exactly the same temperature. Based on the above, the functional limitation is unclear what is structurally required for an annular channel to be considered an annular heating channel, see MPEP 2173.05(g).
Claim 14 recites, “wherein the oil inlet and outlet orifices of said or each heating channel are inclined with respect to the radial directions”. There is insufficient antecedent basis “the oil inlet and outlet orifices” in the claim. The applicant may have intended for claim 14 to depend from claim 11 which would make the claim have proper antecedent basis.
Claim 16 recites “the segment associated with this channel”. The antecedent basis is presumably one of the two annular sealing segments. An appropriate correction is required.
Claims dependent from claim 1 are also rejected due to their dependency.
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 1-5, 16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olivier et al. (FR3088680) hereinafter Olivier in view of Wohrl et al. (U.S Patent 5,099,966) hereinafter Wohrl.
A translation was provided; the claim mappings reference the translation.
Regarding claim 1, Olivier discloses:
A device for guiding a shaft of an aircraft turbine engine {page 1}, the device comprising:
a rolling bearing comprising two rings, a first ring and a second ring respectively, between which rolling elements are mounted {Figure 2, roller bearing (10,11) comprises two rings (13)/(14) between which rolling elements (16 are mounted)},
an annular bearing support extending around the bearing {Figures 2/3, annular bearing support (12)/(46) extends around the bearing (10,11)}, and
an oil film compression damping system mounted between the bearing support and the second ring {Figures 2/3, oil film compression damping system (19) is mounted between the bearing support (12)/(46) and second ring (14)},
this damping system comprising:
an annular shrink ring interposed between the bearing support and the second ring {Figure 3, annular shrink ring (23) is interposed between the bearing support (46) and the second ring (14)},
two annular sealing segments, upstream and downstream respectively, which are housed in annular grooves formed in an external cylindrical surface of the second ring and which are able to bear radially on an internal cylindrical surface of the shrink ring {Figure 3, (25a/b) are two annular sealing segments upstream and downstream respectively and are housing in annular grooves (26) that are in the external cylindrical surface of the second ring (14) and are able to bear radially on the internal cylindrical surface of the shrink ring (23)},
these external and internal surfaces defining between them an annular space for the formation of an oil film which is delimited axially by the sealing segments {Figure 3, the external surface of (14) and the internal surface of (23) defines an annular space (21) for the formation of an oil film axially delimited by the sealing segments (25a/b)},
each of these segments being slit by a straight cut to allow the evacuation of the oil from this space {Figure 5b (33) are straight cuts which allow oil from the space in the sealing segments (25a/b)}, and
a first oil supply circuit {Figure 3, inlet (49) outlet (54)},
this first circuit being connected to an annular supply channel which extends around the space and is connected to this space by orifices formed in the shrink ring {Figure 3, the first circuit is connected to an annular supply channel (47) which extends around the space (20) and is connected to the space by orifice (50) formed in the shrink ring (23)}.
Olivier does not disclose:
characterized in that the damping system further comprises:
a second oil supply circuit,
this second circuit being connected to at least one annular heating channel which is independent of said supply channel and which extends around the space and in line with one of the sealing segments.
Wohrl pertains to bearing damper systems. Wohrl teaches:
characterised in that the damping system further comprises:
a second oil supply circuit {Figure 2 (19)/(20)/(21); Column 1 lines 66-68},
this second circuit being connected to at least one annular heating channel which is independent of said supply channel and which extends around the space and in line with one of the sealing segments {Figure 2, the second circuit is connected to annular heating channel (24) which is independent of the supply channel (3) of the first circuit and extends around the space (2) of the damper and is line with the sealing segments that are the radially extending portions of (25)/(26)}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added a second circuit which controls the temperature of the squeeze film damper as taught by Wohrl for the system of Olivier. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to to control the temperature of the oil and therefore optimally damp the rotating system {Wohrl Column 3 line 67- Column 4 line 16}.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl further teaches:
wherein the supply channel is formed in the annular support or in the shrink ring {Olivier Figures 2 / 3, (47) is formed in the annular support (12)/(46)}.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl further teaches:
wherein said or each heating channel is formed in the annular support and/or in the shrink ring {Wohrl Figure 2 (24) is formed in the annular support (5)}.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl further teaches:
wherein the supply channel has an axial extent greater than an axial extent of said orifices {Olivier Figure 3 (47) has an axial extend greater than the axial extent of the orifices (50)}.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl further teaches:
wherein said or each heating channel has an axial extent greater than an axial extent of the sealing segment around which it extends {Wohrl, the heating channel (23)/(24) extends a greater axial extend than the radial portions of (25)/(26) which are the sealing segment(s) around which they extend}.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl further teaches:
wherein said or each heating channel has an axial extent which represents one to five times an axial extent of the segment associated with this channel {Wohrl Figure 3. What is considered “the heating channel” of Wohrl is open to interpretation. The open-ended nature of the claim due to the term “comprising” means that it is possible for only a portion of the entire heating circuit of (19)/(20)/(21)/(22)/(23) to be considered the heating channel. The examiner finds that the heating channel may be considered a portion of (22) next to (25) and/or a portion of (23) next to (26). With the degree of interpretation possible it easily allows for the length of this portion to fall within the claimed ratio of the axial extents}.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl further teaches:
wherein when the supply channel is of the decentered type {Decentered type does not define what the supply channel is decentered relative to and what is required. The examiner finds that supply channel of Olivier (47) is decentered relative to orifice (50) under a broadest reasonable interpretation as the orifice is purely radial and (47) is angled and has an overhang relative to the orifice},
the device comprises a single heating channel {Wohrl Figure 2 (22)/(23) is a single heating channel as there is a single circuit of fluid in series with feed line (20) and return line (21). Even if the heating channel disclosed by Wohrl were considered to comprise multiple heating channels, multiple heating channels would still comprise (inclusive / open-ended) a single heating channel, see MPEP 2111.03 I}.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl further teaches:
An aircraft turbine engine comprising a shaft guided in rotation by a device according to claim 1 {First paragraph on second page of Olivier describes how the device is used for aircraft turbine engine shafts}.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olivier in view of Wohrl as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Meacham et al. (U.S Pre-Grant Publication 20090110572) hereinafter Meacham.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Olivier and Wohrl is silent regarding:
wherein the second ring of the guiding device is associated with a flexible cage and comprises an openwork annular web connected to an annular fixing flange {Figure 14 (1424) is the second ring and is associated with a flexible cage on the left side of the figure with an openwork annular web connected to an annular fixing flange on the right side of the figure}.
The combination of Olivier and Wohrl does not show all the structures associated with the second ring of the guiding device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a flexible cage as claimed associated with the second ring of the combination of Olivier and Wohrl based on the teachings of Meacham. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so as these cages structures are well known to transmit forces from the squeeze film dampers of bearings {Meacham [0023]/[0063]}.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL K. REITZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1387. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 a.m. -5:30 p.m.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at 5712703508. 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.
/MICHAEL K. REITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights