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 .
Claims 1-11 are currently pending. Claims 1, 5-11 are allowed. Claims 2-4 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pg. 8 of the response, filed June 18, 2026, with respect to the objections of Claims 2-3 and rejections of Claims 1-11 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of amendments. The objections of Claims 2-3 and rejections of Claims 1-11 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pg. 9 of the response, filed with respect to the rejections of Claims 2 and 4 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Mizukami and the obviousness of ranges stated in MPEP 2144.05. Alternatively, the claims are rejected as being anticipated by Mizukami.
Applicant argues Claims 2, 4 to be allowable in view of Claim 6 indicated as being allowable. However, Claim 6 was previously indicated as allowable for its dependency upon Claim 1. The scope of Claims 2 and 4 differ from that of previously presented Claim 6, as they do not include the limitations of Claim 1. Therefore, the argument is found to be unpersuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mizukami et al. (JP 2010276010 A), hereinafter Mizukami. References to the text of Mizukami will refer to the machine translation provided on March 18, 2026.
Regarding Claim 2, Figures 1-3 of Mizukami disclose a turbine stator vane (see paragraph [0042]) comprising: a first partition wall and a second partition wall that partition an internal space (20b) of an airfoil (10), the airfoil (10) having a leading edge; and a plurality of through-holes (11c, d, e) that penetrate vane walls (20) constituting the airfoil (10), wherein the first partition wall is the closest partition wall to the leading edge that extends from a pressure surface side connection position (see intersection of first partition with pressure side), which is a connection position between the first partition wall and the vane wall (20) on a pressure surface side of the airfoil (10), to a suction surface side connection position (see intersection of first partition with suction side), which is a connection position between the first partition wall and the vane wall (20) on a suction surface side of the airfoil (10), the second partition wall extends from a leading edge side connection position (see intersection of second partition and leading), which is a connection position between the second partition wall and the vane wall (20) on the leading edge side of the airfoil (10), to a trailing edge side connection position (see intersection of second partition wall with first partition wall), which is a connection position between the second partition wall and the first partition wall, and partitions the internal space (20b) into a pressure surface side leading edge cavity (20b to left of second partition wall in Figure 1) and a suction surface side leading edge cavity (20b to right of second partition wall in Figure 1), of angles of intersection between a first virtual straight line (line extending along first partition wall) that passes through the pressure surface side connection position and the suction surface side connection position and an extending direction of the vane wall (20) at the suction surface side connection position, an angle of intersection that is on the leading edge side with respect to the first virtual straight line is an obtuse angle, and an angle of intersection that is on a trailing edge side of the airfoil with respect to the first virtual straight line is an acute angle as seen in a vane height direction of the airfoil, the through-holes (11c, d, e) include pressure surface side through-holes (see Figure 2) that open into the pressure surface side leading edge cavity and suction surface side through-holes (not shown due to view in Figure 3, note cooling holes 11c, d, e are formed connected 11b [0041]) that open into the suction surface side leading edge cavity, a third partition wall that extends toward the trailing edge side from the trailing edge side connection position and that partitions the internal space (20b) is provided [0040-0044]. See also annotated Figures 1’ and 1’’ below. Figure 1’ is an annotation with two orthogonal lines, clarifying the angle of intersection that is on the leading edge side with respect to the first virtual straight line is obtuse.
PNG
media_image1.png
545
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
683
804
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Mizukami does not explicitly state an angle of intersection between a second virtual straight line that passes through the leading edge side connection position and the trailing edge side connection position and an extending direction of the vane wall at the leading edge side connection is equal to or greater than 80 degrees and equal to or smaller than 100 degrees as seen in the vane height direction as claimed.
However, it is noted that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close (see MPEP 2144.05, I). The instant application defines the extending direction of the vane wall to be the extending direction of a line tangent to a center line of the thickness of the vane wall [0021]. Figure 1 of Mizukami shows the second virtual straight line (follows 2nd partition) lining up with or at least close to the direction of the thickness of the vane wall. The extending direction of the vane is the tangent at “Leading”. The second virtual straight line and the tangent at “Leading” intersect at “Leading”. Lining up with the direction of thickness will result in an angle of intersection of 90 degrees. In this instance, the claimed range is considered anticipated by Mizukami, since 90 is within the range of equal to or greater than 80 and equal to or less than 100. Alternatively, since the value is not explicitly stated, but the illustrated angle is at least close to the claimed range, the claimed range is considered obvious for being close to what is illustrated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbine stator vane taught by Mizukami such that an angle of intersection between a second virtual straight line that passes through the leading edge side connection position and the trailing edge side connection position and an extending direction of the vane wall at the leading edge side connection is equal to or greater than 80 degrees and equal to or smaller than 100 degrees as seen in the vane height direction, since a prima facie case of obviousness exists when the claimed ranges or amounts are merely close with the prior art.
Regarding Claim 3, Mizukami discloses the turbine stator vane as set forth in Claim 2.
Figure 1 of Mizukami discloses wherein, of angles of intersection between a fourth virtual straight line (along third partition) connecting the trailing edge side connection position and an end portion of the third partition wall on the trailing edge side to each other and the first virtual straight line (along first partition), an angle of intersection (see at intersection between first and third partition, left angle in Figure 1) that is on the pressure surface side with respect to the fourth virtual straight line and that is on the trailing edge side with respect to the first virtual straight line is an acute angle, and an angle of intersection (see at intersection between first and third partition, right angle in Figure 1) that is on the suction surface side with respect to the fourth virtual straight line and that is on the trailing edge side with respect to the first virtual straight line is an obtuse angle as seen in the vane height direction (view in Figure 1). See also annotated Figure 1’’ above.
Regarding Claim 4, Figures 1-3 of Mizukami disclose a turbine stator vane (see paragraph [0042]) comprising: a first partition wall and a second partition wall that partition an internal space (20b) of an airfoil (10), the airfoil (10) having a leading edge; and a plurality of through-holes (11c, d, e) that penetrate vane walls (20) constituting the airfoil (10), wherein the first partition wall is the closest partition wall to the leading edge that extends from a pressure surface side connection position (see intersection of first partition with pressure side), which is a connection position between the first partition wall and the vane wall (20) on a pressure surface side of the airfoil (10), to a suction surface side connection position (see intersection of first partition with suction side), which is a connection position between the first partition wall and the vane wall (20) on a suction surface side of the airfoil (10), the second partition wall extends from a leading edge side connection position (see intersection of second partition and leading), which is a connection position between the second partition wall and the vane wall (20) on a leading edge side of the airfoil (10), to a trailing edge side connection position (see intersection of second partition wall with first partition wall), which is a connection position between the second partition wall and the first partition wall, and partitions the internal space (20b) into a pressure surface side leading edge cavity (20b to left of second partition wall in Figure 1) and a suction surface side leading edge cavity (20b to right of second partition wall in Figure 1), of angles of intersection between a first virtual straight line (line extending along first partition wall) that passes through the pressure surface side connection position and the suction surface side connection position and an extending direction of the vane wall (20) at the suction surface side connection position, an angle of intersection that is on the leading edge side with respect to the first virtual straight line is an obtuse angle, and an angle of intersection that is on a trailing edge side of the airfoil with respect to the first virtual straight line is an acute angle as seen in a vane height direction of the airfoil, the through-holes (11c, d, e) include pressure surface side through-holes (see Figure 2) that open into the pressure surface side leading edge cavity and suction surface side through-holes (not shown due to view in Figure 3, note cooling holes 11c, d, e are formed connected 11b [0041]) that open into the suction surface side leading edge cavity, the first partition is linearly formed along the first virtual straight line as seen in the vane height direction (view in Figure 1) [0040-0044]. See also annotated Figures 1’ and 1’’ above. Figure 1’ is an annotation with two orthogonal lines, clarifying the angle of intersection that is on the leading edge side with respect to the first virtual straight line is obtuse.
Mizukami does not explicitly state an angle of intersection between a second virtual straight line that passes through the leading edge side connection position and the trailing edge side connection position and an extending direction of the vane wall at the leading edge side connection is equal to or greater than 80 degrees and equal to or smaller than 100 degrees as seen in the vane height direction as claimed.
However, it is noted that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close (see MPEP 2144.05, I). The instant application defines the extending direction of the vane wall to be the extending direction of a line tangent to a center line of the thickness of the vane wall [0021]. Figure 1 of Mizukami shows the second virtual straight line (follows 2nd partition) lining up with or at least close to the direction of the thickness of the vane wall. The extending direction of the vane is the tangent at “Leading”. The second virtual straight line and the tangent at “Leading” intersect at “Leading”. Lining up with the direction of thickness will result in an angle of intersection of 90 degrees. In this instance, the claimed range is considered anticipated by Mizukami, since 90 is within the range of equal to or greater than 80 and equal to or less than 100. Alternatively, since the value is not explicitly stated, but the illustrated angle is at least close to the claimed range, the claimed range is considered obvious for being close to what is illustrated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbine stator vane taught by Mizukami such that an angle of intersection between a second virtual straight line that passes through the leading edge side connection position and the trailing edge side connection position and an extending direction of the vane wall at the leading edge side connection is equal to or greater than 80 degrees and equal to or smaller than 100 degrees as seen in the vane height direction, since a prima facie case of obviousness exists when the claimed ranges or amounts are merely close with the prior art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 5-11 are allowed.
Claims 1 and 5-11 remain allowable for the same reasons set forth on Pg. 8-10 of the Non-Final Rejection filed March 18, 2026.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELTON K WONG whose telephone number is (408)918-7626. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM - 5:00PM PST.
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, Court Heinle can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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.
/ELTON K WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights