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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the trailing edge side curved surface has a region that is recessed to be closer to the leading edge side than an extension line of the trailing edge side contact surface is” and “the leading edge side curved surface has a region that is recessed to be closer to the trailing edge side than an extension line of the leading edge side contact surface is” (claim 1) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. It appears that the “extension lines” (Lvt, Lvl) are lines that extend from forward to aft, and they run across the curved surfaces (see Fig 5). Therefore it is unclear how the trailing edge side and leading edge side “curved surfaces” are “closer” to the leading edge side and trailing edge side, respectively, than the respective extension lines.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-12 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.
In claim 1, “a shroud portion that is positioned closer to a blade tip side than the airfoil portion is” is indefinite. It is unclear how a “shroud portion” can be closer to a blade tip side than the airfoil portion is. The airfoil portion comprises the blade tip portion (see para 20, Fig 2). Therefore, the airfoil portion is as “close” to the blade tip portion as can be possible.
In claim 1, “a trailing edge side” (line 15) is indefinite because it is unclear if it is the same or different from the previously defined trailing edge side.
In claim 1, “at least one of a first condition and a second condition is satisfied on an assumption that …” is indefinite. It is unclear if the claim is requiring that one of the first condition and the second condition be satisfied, or if it is simply saying that one of the conditions may be satisfied under certain conditions.
It is further unclear if the “assumptions” are required structural limitations, or if they possibilities (not required structure; for example, mental or mathematical processes).
In claim 1, “the trailing edge side curved surface has a region that is recessed to be closer to the leading edge side than an extension line of the trailing edge side contact surface is” and “the leading edge side curved surface has a region that is recessed to be closer to the trailing edge side than an extension line of the leading edge side contact surface is” are indefinite. It appears that the “extension lines” (Lvt, Lvl) are lines that extend from forward to aft, and they run across the curved surfaces (see Fig 5). Therefore it is unclear how the trailing edge side and leading edge side “curved surfaces” are “closer” to the leading edge side and trailing edge side, respectively, than the respective extension lines.
In claim 8, “the radius of curvature” is indefinite because multiple different radii of curvature have been defined – it is unclear which is being referred to.
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) 1, 3-4, 6-7 as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2005/0106025 (Snook).
Regarding claim 1, 3-4, 6-7, Snook teaches a turbine blade (Fig 2) comprising: an airfoil portion that extends in a blade height direction (airfoil 36; blade height in the radial direction) and that includes a pressure surface and a suction surface extending between a leading edge and a trailing edge (Fig 8; pressure surface on the bottom, suction surface on the top, leading edge at the left, trailing edge at the right along the airfoil profile 36/37); and a shroud portion that is positioned closer to a blade tip side than the airfoil portion is (shroud portion 42), wherein a trailing edge side end portion of the shroud portion includes a trailing edge side contact surface that has a normal line extending along a chord direction of the airfoil portion and that is formed to face a trailing edge side in the chord direction (annotated below), and a trailing edge side curved surface that is connected to an end portion of the trailing edge side contact surface on a leading edge side as seen in the blade height direction (annotated below; trailing edge side curved surface having the first and second radius of curvatures), a leading edge side end portion of the shroud portion includes a leading edge side contact surface that has a normal line extending along the chord direction and that is formed to face a leading edge side in the chord direction (annotated below), and a leading edge side curved surface that is connected to an end portion of the leading edge side contact surface on a trailing edge side as seen in the blade height direction (annotated below; leading edge side curved surface having the third and fourth radius of curvatures), and at least one of a first condition and a second condition is satisfied on an assumption that a radius of curvature of the trailing edge side curved surface at a first position as seen in the blade height direction is a first radius of curvature (annotated below), the radius of curvature at a second position, which is farther from the trailing edge side contact surface than the first position is, as seen in the blade height direction is a second radius of curvature (annotated below), a radius of curvature of the leading edge side curved surface at a third position as seen in the blade height direction is a third radius of curvature (annotated below), the radius of curvature at a fourth position, which is farther from the leading edge side contact surface than the third position is, as seen in the blade height direction is a fourth radius of curvature (annotated below), the first condition is regarded as satisfied in a case where the trailing edge side curved surface has a region that is recessed to be closer to the leading edge side than an extension line of the trailing edge side contact surface is as seen in the blade height direction and the second radius of curvature is smaller than the first radius of curvature (as annotated below; the first condition is satisfied; the second radius is smaller than the first radius), and the second condition is regarded as satisfied in a case where the leading edge side curved surface has a region that is recessed to be closer to the trailing edge side than an extension line of the leading edge side contact surface is as seen in the blade height direction and the fourth radius of curvature is smaller than the third radius of curvature (as annotated below, the second condition is satisfied; the fourth radius is smaller than the third radius), at least the first condition is satisfied (as discussed above), and the trailing edge side curved surface includes, as seen in the blade height direction, a first arc having the first radius of curvature and a second arc having the second radius of curvature (as annotated below; the “first arc” having the first radius; the “second arc” having the second radius), a tangent of the first arc coincides with a tangent of the second arc at a position of contact between the first arc and the second arc (as annotated below), at least the second condition is satisfied (as discussed above), and the leading edge side curved surface includes, as seen in the blade height direction, a third arc having the third radius of curvature and a fourth arc having the fourth radius of curvature (as annotated below; the “third arc” having the third radius; the “fourth arc” having the fourth radius), a tangent of the third arc coincides with a tangent of the fourth arc at a position of contact between the third arc and the fourth arc (as annotated below).
PNG
media_image1.png
724
694
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
388
526
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
233
444
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 2, 5, 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2005/0106025 (Snook) in view of WO 2014/113043 (McKaveney).
Regarding claims 2 and 5, Snook teaches the first condition and the second condition are satisfied (as discussed under claim 1 above), but fails to teach the first radius of curvature is equal to or larger than 1.5 times the second radius of curvature or the third radius of curvature is equal to or larger than 1.5 times the fourth radius of curvature. However, McKaveney teaches that a compound fillet (having a small radius of curvature and a large radius of curvature) may make the larger radius of curvature equal to or larger than 1.5 times the smaller radius of curvature (see para 15, 19-20, 41-45, Fig 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the first radius of curvature is equal to or larger than 1.5 times the second radius of curvature or the third radius of curvature is equal to or larger than 1.5 times the fourth radius of curvature in order to provide a desired stress reduction, as taught by McKaveney. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, the first radius of curvature is equal to or larger than 1.5 times the second radius of curvature or the third radius of curvature is equal to or larger than 1.5 times the fourth radius of curvature yields predictable results (stress reduction).
Regarding claims 8-9, Snook teaches the first condition is satisfied (as discussed under claim 1 above), but fails to teach at least a partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the trailing edge side contact surface on the leading edge side increases, at least the partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval. However, McKaveney teaches a compound fillet (having a small radius of curvature and a large radius of curvature) may have a smooth transition, gradually decreasing in radius such that the curved surface forms a portion of an oval (see para 15, 19-20, 41-45, Fig 3; gradual decrease from 94 to 92 so that the curvature is a portion of an oval). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the trailing edge side contact surface on the leading edge side increases, at least the partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval in order to reduce stress, as taught by McKaveney.
Regarding claims 10-11, Snook teaches the second condition is satisfied (as discussed under claim 1 above), but fails to teach at least a partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the leading edge side contact surface on the trailing edge side increases, at least the partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval. However, McKaveney teaches a compound fillet (having a small radius of curvature and a large radius of curvature) may have a smooth transition, gradually decreasing in radius such that the curved surface forms a portion of an oval (see para 15, 19-20, 41-45, Fig 3; gradual decrease from 94 to 92 so that the curvature is a portion of an oval). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide at least a partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the leading edge side contact surface on the trailing edge side increases, at least the partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval in order to reduce stress, as taught by McKaveney.
Regarding claim 12, Snook teaches a gas turbine engine and the blade being a turbine blade (para 17) but fails to teach a combustor for generation of a combustion gas that flows through a combustion gas passage provided with the turbine blade. However, McKaveney teaches a gas turbine engine (Fig 1) comprising a combustor for generation of a combustion gas that flows through a combustion gas passage provided with the turbine blade (combustor 56; combustion gas flows to turbine 28 with turbine blades – see Fig 1, para 32-35). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a combustor for generation of a combustion gas that flows through a combustion gas passage provided with the turbine blade in order to drive the turbine, as taught by McKaveney. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, a combustor for generation of a combustion gas that flows through a combustion gas passage provided with the turbine blade yields predictable results (driving the turbine).
Claim(s) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2005/0106025 (Snook) in view of US 2006/0263213 (Barb).
Regarding claims 8-9, Snook teaches the first condition is satisfied (as discussed under claim 1 above), but fails to teach at least a partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the trailing edge side contact surface on the leading edge side increases, at least the partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval. However, Barb teaches a partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the trailing edge side contact surface on the leading edge side increases, at least the partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval (Fig 3, para 12-13; partial region having a gradual decrease in radius in curvature from 50 to 52 to form a portion of an oval). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the trailing edge side contact surface on the leading edge side increases, at least the partial region of the trailing edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval in order to reduce stress, as taught by Barb.
Regarding claims 10-11, Snook teaches the second condition is satisfied (as discussed under claim 1 above), but fails to teach at least a partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the leading edge side contact surface on the trailing edge side increases, at least the partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval. However, Barb teaches a partial region of a curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to an end portion of a side contact surface increases, at least the partial region of the curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval (Fig 3, para 12-13; partial region having a gradual decrease in radius in curvature from 50 to 52 to form a portion of an oval). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide at least a partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is formed such that the radius of curvature gradually decreases as a distance to the end portion of the leading edge side contact surface on the trailing edge side increases, at least the partial region of the leading edge side curved surface as seen in the blade height direction is a portion of an oval in order to reduce stress, as taught by Barb.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2014/0140841 and US 2013/0084169 each teach a shroud with contact surfaces and curved surfaces (Fig 3-4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5063. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am - 4 pm, Monday-Friday.
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 (Pat) 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.
/ANDREW H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
