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 .
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 5. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 2-4, 10, 16-17 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.
Claims 2-4, 10, 16-17 each recites: “an axial displacement” in lines 4, 5, 6, 3, 2 and 3 respectively which is a double recitation; it is unclear whether this is the same “an axial displacement” recited in claim 1. The metes and bounds of the claims are unclear.
Claim 4 recites: “a signal portion” in line 6. It is unclear whether this is part or different from “several successive signal portions” recited above in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the other signal portions" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tomescu (US 2021/0071589 A1).
Tomescu teaches method for detecting an axial displacement of a turbomachine fan (130) which is able to rotate about a longitudinal axis and which comprises a rotor disc (132) and a plurality of blades with variable angular setting mounted at the periphery of the disc (Fig. 1, paras. 0020-0022),
the detecting method comprising the use, on the one hand, of several setting reference members (202) secured to the rotor disc and of at least one sensor (212) positioned fixedly with respect to the fan and on the trajectory of the setting reference members during the rotation of the fan (Fig. 2, para. 0024) for detecting an axial displacement of the fan based on the detection of an axial displacement of the setting reference members (paras. 0007, 0024-0025), the setting members and said at least one sensor being used for determining an angular setting position of at least one blade (paras. 0007, 0024-0025).
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.
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) 1-10, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daggett et al (US 2023/0021280 A1) hereinafter Daggett in view of Tomescu (US 2021/0071589 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Daggett teaches an aircraft turbomachine comprising:
a fan (38) which is able to rotate about a longitudinal axis (12) and which comprises a rotor disc (42) and a plurality of blades (40) with variable angular setting mounted at the periphery of the disc (Fig. 1, para. 0029),
a system for determining an angular setting position of at least one blade comprising:
several setting reference members (80,82,84,86) which are secured to the rotor disc (Fig. 2; paras. 0038-0043)
a position reference element (94) secured to said at least one blade (40) and which is able to change angular position with respect to the setting reference members in the event of modification of the angular setting of said at least one blade (Figs. 3-5; para. 0046),
wherein the turbomachine is configured to detect an axial displacement of the fan by detecting an axial displacement of the setting references members (Fig. 2; paras. 0038-0043).
Daggett does not specifically teach at least one sensor which is positioned fixedly with respect to the fan and which is able to determine a relative angular position between the position reference element and the setting reference members by detecting the passage of the position reference element and of the setting reference members during the rotation of the fan and the detecting of the axial displacement of the setting references members based of the at one sensor.
However, Tomescu teaches an aircraft turbomachine comprising: a propeller (130) which is able to rotate about a longitudinal axis (A) and which comprises a rotor disc and a plurality of blades (410) with variable angular setting mounted at the periphery of the disc (132) (Figs. 1-3, paras. 0026-0028); a system for determining an angular setting position of at least one blade comprising: several setting reference members (202, 402) (Figs. 2-4; paras. 0027-0028) and a position reference secured to said at least one blade and at least one sensor (212) which is positioned fixedly with respect to the propeller and which is able to determine a relative angular position between the position reference element and the setting reference members by detecting the passage of the position reference element and of the setting reference members during the rotation of the propeller (paras. 0007, 0024-0025), wherein the turbomachine is configured to detect an axial displacement of the fan by detecting an axial displacement of the setting reference members (202, 402) based on said at least one sensor (212) (paras. 0007, 0024-0025).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a sensor mounted on the fan as taught by Tomescu in order to determine the axial displacement based on a signal from a sensor.
Regarding claim 2, Daggett as modified Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the turbomachine comprises a processing unit (222, 220) which is configured to carry out processing on at least one signal produced by said at least one sensor for the purpose of detecting an axial displacement of the setting reference members (Tomescu, Fig. 2, para. 0027).
Regarding claim 3, Daggett as modified Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 2. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the processing comprises a comparison between said at least one signal produced by said at least one sensor and at least one reference signal representative of a non-offset axial position of the setting reference members (Tomescu, paras. 0007-0008 and 0027-0028) and a detection of an axial displacement of the setting reference members in the event of determination of a difference from said at least one reference signal (Tomescu, paras. 0007-0008 and 0027-0028).
Regarding claim 4, Daggett as modified Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 2. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the processing comprises an analysis of said at least one signal produced by said at least one sensor (Tomescu, paras. 0007-0008 and 0027-0028) and comprising several successive signal portions, and a detection of an axial displacement of the setting reference members in the event of detection, in said at least one signal thus analyzed, of a signal portion having a shorter period or a smaller amplitude than that of the other signal portions of said at least one analyzed signal (Tomescu, paras. 0007-0008 and 0027-0028).
Regarding claims 5-6, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches at least one setting reference member has an overall shape that is elongated along the longitudinal axis and extends from a first end (circular portion 88; Daggett, Fig. 2) to an opposite second end (Daggett, Fig. 2) which is closer to said at least one sensor than the first end and which has a reduced width by comparison with the first end (Daggett, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the setting reference members are distributed along a circumference of the rotor disc (Daggett, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 7. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the setting reference members are distributed, either into a group of setting reference members or into several groups of setting reference members distributed along a circumference of the rotor disc (Daggett, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 7. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches at least certain groups of the setting reference members each include at least two or three successive setting reference members (Daggett, Fig. 2). (Daggett, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 8. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the turbomachine is configured to confirm a detection of an axial displacement, either by detecting the axial displacement at least twice, based on one and the same group of setting reference members, or by detecting the axial displacement at least twice, based on at least two different groups of setting reference members (Daggett, Fig. 2 and Tomescu, paras. 0007, 0024-0025).
Regarding claim 16, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 9. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the turbomachine is configured to confirm a detection of an axial displacement, either by detecting the axial displacement at least twice, based on one and the same group of setting reference members, or by detecting the axial displacement at least twice, based on at least two different groups of setting reference members (Daggett, Fig. 2 and Tomescu, paras. 0007, 0024-0025).
Regarding claim 17, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches a system (222, 220) for controlling the operation of the turbomachine which is configured to stop the operation of the turbomachine in the event of detection of an axial displacement of the fan (Tomescu, paras. 0007, 0024-0025, 0052, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches said at least one sensor is, an inductive sensor (Tomescu, para. 0027).
Regarding claim 19, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches the turbomachine is also configured to determine a speed of rotation of the fan based on said at least one sensor (Tomescu, para. 0033).
Regarding claim 20, Daggett as modified by Tomescu teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Daggett as modified by Tomescu further teaches a reduction gear box (46) to which the fan is connected (Daggett, Fig. 1, para. 0029).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2018/0335047 A1 discloses a turbomachine having a pitchable fan blades and reference setting members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAXIME M ADJAGBE whose telephone number is (571)272-4920. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-6.
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, NATHANIEL E WIEHE can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/MAXIME M ADJAGBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights