DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The specification amendment filed 01/09/2026 is acceptable and has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, 4, 8, 9-11, 13, 14, 17, 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
change claim 1 line 18 accordingly: “the outer combustor liner”
change claim 1 line 19 accordingly: “source of the quench air”
change claim 1 line 29 accordingly: “pump the fuel from”
change claim 1 line 33 accordingly: “combustor as the fuel”
change claim 1 line 34 accordingly: “and the combustor secondary”
change claim 3 line 2 accordingly: “direct the fuel”
change claim 3 line 9 accordingly: “and the combustor secondary”
change claim 4 lines 2-3 accordingly: “create a plurality of fuel flows of the primary fuel flow and a secondary fuel flow [[flows]]”
change claim 4 line 4 accordingly: “direct the fuel”
change claim 4 line 5 accordingly: “as the secondary fuel flow”
change claim 8 lines 2-3 accordingly: “a plurality of inner diameter (ID) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive ID inner combustor liner cooling air and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) inner combustor liner”
change claim 9 line 5 accordingly: “hot combustor exhaust gas”
change claim 9 line 10 accordingly: “plurality of hollow struts”
change claim 10 line 3 accordingly: “[[the]] a fuel flow path so that fuel can be thermally isolated [[form]] from hot combustor gases”
change claim 11 line 21 accordingly: “cool the outer combustor liner and to provide a source of the quench air”
change claim 13 line 2 accordingly: “direct the fuel”
change claim 13 line 9 accordingly: “and the combustor secondary inlet air”
change claim 14 line 3 accordingly: “direct the fuel”
change claim 14 line 5 accordingly: “direct the fuel”
change claim 17 line 1 accordingly: “the [[a]] quench zone”
change claim 19 lines 2-3 accordingly: “plurality of inner diameter (ID) inner combustor liner cooling air nozzles to receive and direct ID inner combustor liner cooling air … and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) inner combustor liner”
change claim 20 line 4 accordingly: “and [[the]] remaining portions”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 18 communicates that rapid quench zone is fluidically isolated from the rich combustion zone (i.e., see claim 18 recitation “fluidically isolate the rich combustion zone from the quench zone”). In the gas turbine arts fluids are either fluidically isolated from each other or in fluid communication with each other. Applicant par. 47 states that “combustion products from the rich combustion zone 104a … flow into the [rapid] quench zone 104b and mix with OD quench air 130c from OD quench tubes 126b and ID quench air 130h from ID quench tubes 126a”. Therefore, it appears that the quench zone is in fluid communication with the rich combustion zone by way of the combustion products flowing from the rich combustion zone to the quench zone. Thus one of ordinary skill would not understand that there was possession of invention regarding the instant claim 18 limitation because the combustion zone and quench zone are in fluid communication with each other rather than fluidically isolated from each other.
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 and 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.
The term “roughly a height” in claims 2 and 12 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “roughly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For example, roughly a height could be 50% of the height, 75% of the height, 110% of the height, etc., and thus one of ordinary skill would not know when the each of the instant claims are infringed.
Claims dependent thereon are rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub. No. US 2007/0234733 A1 (Harris ‘733) in view of US 2009/0241506 A1 (Nilsson) and US 5,163,285 (Mazeaud) as evidenced by US 4,373,325 (Shekleton ‘325).
Regarding claim 1, Harris ‘733 discloses (see fig. 5) a gas turbine engine (see title) comprising: a compressor (32,34; see abstract and claim 1) configured to receive inlet air at a compressor inlet (the compressor must have an inlet in order to receive the air it compresses, the air it compresses being inlet air; see par. 17, top; also see annotated figure below) and generate compressed air at a compressor exit (see annotated figure below); a combustor (the combustor can be (1) structure 80, or (2) can be structure 80 and including combustion housing walls 38 and 40; in the gas turbine arts a combustor or combustion assembly can include walls bounding the airflow traveling to the combustor, such airflows shown at location 41 and 44; the person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) is knowledgeable of this as pointed out in the Pertinent Prior Art section on page 47 of the non-final office action mailed 09/16/2025) positioned fluidically (see abstract, bottom) and physically (see in fig. 5 that combustor 80 is downstream from compressor disc 32 and compressor blade 34) downstream of the compressor, wherein the combustor 80 is fluidically connected to the compressor to receive a first portion (air entering at one or more inlet holes 81 at the most upstream end of combustor, i.e., the location of text “81” at the front of combustor 80 as shown by annotations below; this primary inlet air is used in the rich combustion zone 82, see par. 42, middle and claim 18; the first portion may also be air entering at holes 48, or the first portion may be both instant 81, with 48) of the compressed air as combustor primary inlet air (see earlier in this claim 1 analysis) and wherein the combustor comprises: a toroidal recirculation zone (see par. 18 discussing “recirculation” at location 82 and see ring or toroid shaped circulation in fig. 5 about “82”, recirculation is also at location 84 in fig. 5 such that recirculation zone is at 82 and/or 84) configured to receive and combust fuel in a rich combustion zone (82; see par. 18, bottom pointing out that location 82 is more rich than location 84); an ignitor 88 positioned to ignite an air/fuel mixture in the rich combustion zone (see par. 51); a (the quench air can be pressurized with a cooling air pump as discussed below) quench zone (zone wherein cooling or quench air is provided to the combustor at cooling passages 81 at the annotated location below, such quench air being provided at location 80 in the annotated figure below) downstream (see annotated figure below) of the toroidal recirculation zone (at 82,84), wherein the rapid quench zone is configured to receive and quench (one or more holes 81 are cooling air holes, see par. 42, middle, and thus would quench or cool the combustion products from the recirculation zone at 82 enroute to the turbine blade 64; a POSITA is knowledgeable of this, see pertinent prior art on page 47 of the non-final office action mailed 09/16/2025) with quench air combustion products from the rich combustion zone 82, wherein the rapid quench zone includes an array of quench (tube like structures 81 at annotations below showing structures 81 for quench air); a lean combustion zone downstream of the rapid quench zone,; and a cooling air flow path (the cooling air path of Harris ‘733 goes around the front of the combustor, see front cooling path in annotated figure below that is located between wall 40 and the front portion of combustor liner 46, and goes around the aft portion of combustor 80 by way of path 44) configured to direct a second portion (air from the compressor that is not the first portion ) of the compressed air around an outer combustor liner (the outside surface of combustor wall 46; this is consistent with applicant par. 42, middle) to cool the outer combustor liner (see ”combustor cooling air supply holes 81” at par. 42, middle; see annotated figure below; see par. 45, bottom) and to provide a source of the quench air (see annotated figure below), inner combustor liner cooling air (see holes 81 and par. 47, middle; one or more holes 81 supply the instant inner cooling air), fuel injector 53 air (air through fuel injector 53, see route “combustor exit”, 92, 53; see par. 42, bottom), and combustor secondary inlet air (one or more of holes 48, or one or more holes 81; see par. 45, middle); a turbine (see turbine rotor disc 62 and turbine blade 64 of the turbine of the gas turbine engine in title) positioned fluidically (combustion products enter the turbine; see arrow crossing turbine blade 64 in fig. 5) and physically (see fig. 5) downstream of the combustor 80, wherein the turbine is fluidically connected (air from compressor is combusted in the combustor 80 to create combustion products; see claim 18) to the compressor to receive the hot combustor exhaust gas (see claim 18); a shaft 30 mechanically connecting (see claim 1) the turbine 62,64 and the compressor 32,34, wherein the shaft 30 is configured to: transmit rotational energy from the turbine to the compressor to power the compressor (see claim 1), wherein the shaft connects (see claim 1) the turbine to the compressor; and pump the fuel (see par. 14) from a fuel source (see annotated figure below) to the combustor 80 through a fuel duct 59,61; and at least a portion of the second portion (air from the compressor exit that is not the first portion) of the compressed air before the at least a portion of the second portion of the compressed air enters the combustor 80 as fuel injector air (air at the front side injector 53 that first exits swirler 92) and the combustor secondary inlet air (one or more of holes 48, or one or more holes 81; see par. 45, middle). Harris ‘733 embodiment fig. 5 does not explicitly disclose wherein the lean combustion zone is configured to complete combustion of the fuel and to generate hot combustor exhaust gas; an annulus formed by the combustor surrounding the shaft; the fuel duct in the shaft; and a shaft cooling air pump positioned in the cooling air flow path, wherein the shaft cooling air pump is configured to further compress at least a portion of the second portion of the compressed air.
Harris ‘733 teaches the general concept of completing combustion of fuel in a dilution or lean combustion zone (see par. 6) (such as the dilution or lean combustion zone 86 of Harris ‘733) and hot combustor gas is generated because there has been some combustion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 embodiment of fig. 5 with the lean combustion zone is configured to complete combustion of the fuel and to generate hot combustor exhaust gas as taught by Harris ‘733 in order to facilitate reducing the chance of combustion taking place at the turbine nozzle 58 to prevent damage to the turbine nozzle.
PNG
media_image1.png
539
905
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (compressor inlet)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (inlet air)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (quench air)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (quench air through quench passage)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (fuel source)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (location of compressed air traveling to injector 53)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (secondary fuel injection air)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (splash plate portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (front cooling path)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (compressor exit)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (combustor inlet)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
Nilsson teaches (see fig. 1) a gas turbine 10 and further teaches an annulus formed by a combustor surrounding a shaft (see par. 25, middle, discussing an annulus formed by combustor 26 surrounding shaft 24). It is further noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 at 1395 (U.S. 2007) (MPEP 2143 I.B.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to substitute the annulus (i.e., annular space formed by the combustor surrounding the shaft) taught by Nilsson for space formed by the combustor surrounding the shaft of Harris ‘733 for the purpose of substituting one known element for another in order to provide the expected result of providing a space (formed by combustor 80 and shaft 30) for compressed air to travel to the fuel injector 53 at the annotated location above).
Harris ‘733 teaches (see par. 54) the general concept of a fuel duct (i.e., fuel supply passage in par. 54) in a shaft 30 (a POSITA is knowledgably that a fuel duct in a shaft is compatible with fuel ducts 59 and/or 61 of Harris ‘733; this is discussed in pertinent prior art on page 47 of the non-final office action mailed 09/16/2025). It is further noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 at 1395 (U.S. 2007) (MPEP 2143 I.B.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to substitute the location of the fuel duct of Harris ‘733 par. 54 (i.e., in a shaft) for the location of a portion of fuel ducts 59 and/or 61 of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson for the purpose of substituting one known element for another in order to provide the expected result of providing a location for a duct for fuel with reduced costs and improved fuel metering precision (see Harris ‘733 pars. 14 and 23).
Mazeaud teaches (see fig.) a gas turbine 1 and further teaches (see fig) a shaft (see pump 24 rotor 33 that is a part of engine drive shaft 16) cooling air pump 24 positioned in a cooling air flow path, wherein the shaft cooling air pump is configured to further compress compressed air (air from high pressure compressor 2 of the gas turbine 1 travels the path 10,20a,20b,23 and then enters the shaft cooling air pump 24; see col. 3, ll. 40-50 and the fig.) before the compressed air enters (another portion of the gas turbine). Shekleton ‘325 is evidence that fuel injectors for gas turbines that atomize fuel need additional pressurization during starting of the gas turbine (see col. 13, ll. 40-50). The fuel injectors of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson atomize fuel (see Harris ‘733 par. 20, top)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson with a shaft cooling air pump positioned in the cooling air flow path, wherein the shaft cooling air pump is configured to further compress at least a portion of the second portion of the compressed air in order to facilitate improved performance during starting (see Shekleton ‘325 col. 13, ll. 40-50). Shekleton ‘325 is evidence that fuel injectors for gas turbines that atomize fuel need additional pressurization during starting of the gas turbine (see col. 13, ll. 40-50). The fuel injectors of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson atomize fuel (see Harris ‘733 par. 20, top).
The combination teaches the shaft cooling air pump 24 is configured to further compress air in the cooling air flow path that has been compressed by compressor 32,34 of Harris ‘733. This includes providing a cooling air pump for injector air at the front surface of parabolic surface 53 (of Harris ‘733) and/or providing a cooling air pump for injector air at the aft surface of parabolic surface 53.
PNG
media_image3.png
297
391
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (outer height of compressor inlet)][AltContent: textbox (engine shaft 30)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (inner height of compressor inlet)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (compressor inlet)][AltContent: arrow]
Regarding claim 2, Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris ‘733 discloses the toroidal recirculation zone (at 82) has a height (see grey annotated double arrow above) that is roughly a height (see grey annotated double arrow above) of the compressor inlet (see annotated figure above). Alternatively, the inner height of the compressor inlet (see annotated figure above) above the engine shaft 30 is roughly an inner height of toroidal recirculation zone at 82 (see annotated figure above) above the engine shaft 30. The phrase “to provide a desired flow residence time in the rich combustion zone” is intended use and the prior art need only be capable of performing the intended use. There is a residence time of the combustion gasses in the rich combustion zone 82 and this time is at least partially desired because the Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud combustor operates with improved efficiency over the prior art (see Harris ‘733 par. 13).
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud as evidenced by Shekleton ‘325 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent 4,845,940 (Beer), US Patent 4,928,479 (Shekleton ‘479) and US Patent 9,631,814 B1 (Barton).
Regarding claim 3, Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris ‘733 further discloses (see fig. 5) a plurality of fuel injectors (overall fuel injector 53 has two fuel injectors; (1) the downstream end of fuel duct 61 injecting fuel to the front side of parabolic surface 53, and (2) the downstream end of fuel duct 59 injecting fuel onto the aft side of parabolic surface 53; see par. 18, bottom, par. 44 and claim 15) configured to direct the fuel (from the front parabolic surface; see par. 42, bottom) into the toroidal recirculation zone (at 82 and/or 84); and a splash plate portion (see annotated figure below) of the inner combustor liner as primary fuel flow (fuel from fuel duct 61), wherein the splash plate portion (see annotated figure above) of the inner combustor liner (inside surface of combustor wall 46) is positioned upstream of the ignitor 88; and a combustor inlet (see annotated figures above and below). Harris ‘733 does not disclose the fuel directed onto the splash plate; a plurality of pre-diffuser deswirl vanes positioned in the cooling air flow path to interact with the second portion of the compressed air; and a plurality of combustor inlet deswirl vanes positioned in the combustor inlet to interact with the combustor primary inlet air and the combustor secondary inlet air.
PNG
media_image5.png
421
418
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (location of deswirl vanes taught by Shekleton ‘479)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (combustor inlet)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (splash plate portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (88)]
Beer teaches a gas turbine (see title) and further teaches fuel is directed to a splash plate portion. Beer teaches in fig. 1 toroidal recirculation (see col. 3, l. 1) is directed to splash plate portions, such toroidal recirculation corresponding with the toroidal recirculation of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud, (see annotated figure below) (of an inner combustor liner (inner surface of liner at 14 for example)). It is further noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 at 1395 (U.S. 2007) (MPEP 2143 I.B.).
PNG
media_image7.png
583
966
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (splash plate portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (splash plate portion)][AltContent: arrow]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to substitute the radial outward extent of the recirculation of Beer (i.e. the fuel/air is directed to the splash plate portion) for radial outward extent of the combination Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud for the purpose of substituting one known element for another in order to provide the expected result of fuel/air distribution in the combustor of the combination. This results in the primary fuel portion of the toroidal recirculation zone of the combination being directed onto the splash plate.
Shekleton ‘479 teaches a gas turbine (see abstract, top) and further teaches (see fig. 1) deswirl vanes 106 positioned in an air flow path (see arrows just downstream of swirl vanes 106 to interact with compressed air (from compressor 16,18; see col. 7, ll. 10-20)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the combination of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud and Beer with pre-diffuser (the air flow diffuses after passing through the deswirl vanes of the combination; see annotated figure above) deswirl vanes positioned in the cooling air flow path to interact with the second portion of the compressed air (the deswirl vanes interact with all air from the compressor of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer and Shekleton ‘479) as taught by Shekleton ‘479 in order to facilitate providing some measure of deswirl to the rotating air from the compressor such that the deswirled air can enter the combustor more efficiently and improved flame zone and combustion efficiency (a POSITA is knowledgeable of this; see pertinent prior art on page 47 of the non-final office action mailed 09/16/2025).
References of the combination of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer and Shekleton ‘479 teach that the plurality of deswirl vanes (vanes 34 taught by Shekleton ‘479) positioned in a combustor (structure 80 and including combustion housing walls 38 and 40) inlet (see annotated figure above) to interact with the combustor primary inlet air and the combustor secondary inlet air (the deswirl vanes taught by Shekleton ‘479 interact with all air from the compressor of the combination). However, such plurality of deswirl vanes may be at a minimum of two deswirl vanes.
Barton teaches in fig. 2 that any number of deswirl vanes 228 can be used in gas turbines (see col. 4, ll. 45-50). It is further noted that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to duplicate the plurality of deswirl vanes of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer and Shekleton ‘479 as taught by Barton in order to arrive at the plurality of deswirl vanes is at least four because a new and unexpected result is not produced by applicant’s plurality of deswirl vanes.
Regarding claim 4, Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer, Shekleton ‘479 and Barton teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris ‘733 further discloses (see fig. 5) the fuel is injected from (as taught in the claim 1 analysis above) the rotating shaft 30 to create a plurality (each of the primary flows can be modulated such that for example the different modulations from fuel duct 61 result in a plurality of primary fuel flows, see par. 49, bottom; the claim does not require for example simultaneous plurality of primary fuel flows) of fuel flows of the primary (fuel from fuel duct 61) and a secondary (fuel from fuel duct 61) fuel flows to: direct the fuel into the toroidal recirculation zone 82,84 along a portion of the inner combustor liner immediately downstream of the plurality of fuel injectors as secondary fuel flow (the secondary fuel flow from the aft portion of fuel injector 53 feeds to location 84 in Harris '733 fig. 5, see par. 42, bottom, such fuel also travels along the inner combustor liner just below recirculation at 84, such inner combustor liner being the inner surface of wall 46 below location 84 in fig. 5; such recirculation travels along the inner combustor liner (inner surface of liner 46) just aft of fuel injector 53 below the text "84"); and to direct the fuel injector air into the toroidal recirculation zone 82,84 to mixt with the primary fuel flow (fuel from fuel duct 61 and the front portion of the parabolic surface of fuel injector 53, see par. 42, bottom) as primary fuel injector air (air from swirler 92) and to mix with the secondary fuel flow (fuel from fuel duct 59) as secondary fuel injector air (see annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 5, The combination of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer, Shekleton ‘479 and Barton teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. References of the combination teach the combustor inlet deswirl vanes (vanes 104 taught by Shekleton ‘479 and located as shown in annotated figure above) are positioned upstream (see annotated figure above) of the ignitor (ignitor 88 of Harris ‘733) and are configured (intended use) to function as bluff bodies to create a quiescent flow zone (a POSITA is knowledgeable that such vanes are capable of performing as bluff bodies; see pertinent prior art on page 47 of the non-final office action mailed 09/16/2025) downstream of the combustor inlet deswirl vanes.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson Mazeaud as evidenced by Shekleton ‘325, Beer, Shekleton ‘479 and Barton as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of US Patent 2,609,663 (Newcomb).
Regarding claim 6, The combination of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer, Shekleton ‘479 and Barton teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris ‘733 further discloses the hollow (60; see par. 46, top) 1st stage turbine vanes 58 are configured to provide structural support (see fig. 5; vanes 58 support inner and outer walls 46 at inner and outer radial extents of vanes 58) for the lean combustion zone 86 of the combustor (structure 80 and including combustion housing walls 38 and 40). Harris ‘733 does not explicitly disclose the combustor inlet deswirl vanes are configured to provide structural support for the rich combustion zone of the combustor.
Newcomb teaches a gas turbine (see col. 1, ll. 1-5) and further teaches (see fig. 1) providing structural support (walls 32,34 support combustor via clips 56) for a rich combustion zone (fuel from pipe 48 is provided to the forward end of the combustor near forward clip 56; see fig. 1) of a combustor 54.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the combination of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer, Shekleton ‘479 and Barton with providing structure support as taught by Newcomb in order to facilitate the combustor of the combination being held in the desired position of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Beer, Shekleton ‘479, Barton and Newcomb. This results in the clip between wall 46 of the combustor and the structure of the combustor inlet (see annotated figures above). Thus the deswirl vanes of the combination would provide the claimed structure support because the deswirl vanes at the combustor inlet that is radially outward of the rich combustion zone at 82 (see Harris ‘733 annotated figures above).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud as evidenced by Shekleton ‘325 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent 3,099,134 (Calder).
Regarding claim 7, Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris further discloses a plurality of inner diameter (ID) quench (passages 81; see annotated figure above) to receive ID quench air and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) quench (passages 81; see annotated figure above) to receive OD quench air. Harris ‘733 does not explicitly disclose the passages are tubes.
Calder teaches a gas turbine (see col. 1, ll. 10-15) and further teaches (see fig. 1) ID quench tubes 17b,17c and OD quench tubes 17b,17c. It is further noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 at 1395 (U.S. 2007) (MPEP 2143 I.B.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to substitute, regarding at least some of the quench passages of the combination, the tube type of quench passage taught by Calder for the type of quench passage of the combination of Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud, or to include such tubes with quench passages of the combination, for the purpose of substituting one known element for another in order to provide the expected result of providing an inlet for dilution or quench air of the combination or in order to facilitate reducing emissions and adding cooling to prevent damage to the turbine inlet nozzle. It is noted that the size of quench tubes varies with the particular application and a POSITA is knowledgeable about combining smaller cooling holes with larger quench passages (see pertinent prior art on page 47 of the non-final office action mailed 09/16/2025).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud as evidenced by Shekleton ‘325 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent 6,931,862 (Harris ‘862) and US Patent 3,407,596 (Dasbach).
Regarding claim 8, Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris ‘733 does not disclose the lean combustion zone 86 further comprises a plurality of inner diameter (ID) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive ID inner combustor liner cooling air and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive OD inner combustor liner cooling air.
Harris ‘862 teaches (see figs. 2-4) a gas turbine 10 and further teaches a lean combustion zone D further comprises a plurality of outer diameter (OD) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes 72 to receive OD inner combustor liner cooling air (see “COMPRESSOR DISCHARGE AIR” in fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud with the lean combustion zone 86 further comprises a plurality of outer diameter (OD) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive OD inner combustor liner cooling air as taught by Harris ‘862 in order to facilitate high combustion efficiency with reliable stability at cruise and other portions of the flight envelope (see Harris ‘862 col. 1, ll. ll. 35-45).
Dasbach teaches a gas turbine (see col. 1, ll. 30-35) and further teaches (see fig. 1) a lean combustion zone (the fuel enters at location 25 and thus the combustion much downstream thereof would be a lean zone) comprises a plurality of inner diameter (ID) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes 23 near location 15 to receive ID inner combustor liner cooling air (see fig. 1 and col. 3, ll. 45-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, and Harris ‘862 with the plurality of inner diameter (ID) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive ID inner combustor liner cooling air as taught by Dasbach in order to facilitate high combustion efficiency .
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud as evidenced by Shekleton ‘325 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Harris ‘862 and US Patent 3,034,298 (White).
Regarding claim 9, Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris ‘733 further discloses (see fig. 5) a plurality of hollow (60; see par. 46, top) 1st stage turbine vanes 58 positioned between the combustor 80 and the turbine 62,64, wherein the hollow 1st stage turbine vanes are configured to (guide the combustor exhaust gas; see par. 46, middle; the well-known function referred to in par. 46 is guiding the instant combustion gas at the proper angle to be received by the turbine blades 64 for efficient expansion of such gasses in the turbine 62,64) the hot combustor exhaust gas enters the turbine 62,64; an aft bearing 10 surrounding (the aft bearing is annular, see figs. 1-3 and corresponding pars. 25-27; see par. 32, top and par. 38, top pointing out that the instant bearing is bearing 10 in fig. 5) the shaft 30 immediately upstream (Harris ‘733 is consistent with applicant fig. 2A wherein applicant guide vanes 128 are axially in between the turbine 108 and the bearing 136) of the turbine 62,64, wherein the aft bearing 10 is configured to provide structural support (see par. 31, top, par. 42, middle and par. 53) for the shaft 30 when it rotates in operation; and a hollow (there is space inside the strut) strut 72 positioned between the plurality of hollow (60; see par. 46, top) 1st stage turbine vanes and the aft bearing, wherein the strut 72 is configured to provide structural support (see par. 42, bottom) for the aft bearing 10. Harris ‘733 does not explicitly disclose removing the bulk circumferential swirl created in the lean combustion zone; and a plurality of hollow struts (Harris ‘733 discloses only one hollow strut).
Harris ‘862 teaches (see figs. 3-4) a bulk circumferential swirl (swirl created from canted tubes 72; see col. 4, ll. 60-67, and see fig. 5 showing example swirling flow) created in a lean combustion zone D.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson and Mazeaud with the bulk circumferential created in the lean combustion zone as taught by Harris ‘862 in order to facilitate high combustion efficiency with reliable stability at cruise and other portions of the flight envelope (see Harris ‘862 col. 1, ll. ll. 35-45). Because the instant vanes guide the flow axially into the turbine, any bulk swirl would be removed, the bulk swirl being directed circumferentially about the axis of the combustor (e.g., see figs. 3 and 5 of Harris ‘862 showing circumferential swirl about central axis X, the circumferential swirl in fig. 5 being withing the annular combustor liner 34).
White teaches a gas turbine (see col. 1, l. 10) and further teaches (see fig. 2) a plurality of hollow struts 70 (configured to provide structural support for an aft bearing, such bearing located just below the text “202”). It is further noted that “the duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”, in re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud and Harris ‘862 with a second hollow strut as taught by White because a new and unexpected result is not produced by applicant’s second strut in order to facilitate providing additional structural support.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud as evidenced by Shekleton ‘325, Harris ‘962 and White as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Pub. No. US 2021/0199300 (Berry) and US Patent 7,937,946 B1 (Harris ‘946).
Regarding claim 10, Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Harris ‘962 and White teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Harris ‘733 further discloses (see fig. 5) the plurality of hollow (60; see par. 46, top discussing hollow feature) 1st stage turbine vanes 58, a hollow (there is space inside the strut; for example fuel line 59 extends through the strut 72, see par. 42, bottom) strut 72 (as modified by White in the claim 9 analysis to arrive at a plurality of struts), and the aft bearing 10 are fluidically connected to a fuel flow path (a fuel flow path such as fuel line 59 runs through the vane 58 shown in fig. 5 and the strut 72 shown in fig. 5 and thus are fluidly connected with the fuel flow path 59; the bearing 10 is fluidly connected with the fuel flow path 59 by way of the air flow at 60 that goes through air holes 74,76) so that fuel can be thermally isolated from hot combustor gases and flow through at least one of the plurality of hollow 1st stage turbine vanes (see fuel line 59 within vane 59 in fig. 5)), at least one of the plurality of hollow struts (see fuel line 59 within strut 72 in fig. 5), when the engine is in operation (fuel in line 59 supplies the combustor for combustion; see par. 18, middle, and par. 42, bottom). Harris ‘733 does not disclose fuel flows through the aft bearing 10. Regarding the phrase “fuel can be thermally isolated form hot combustor gases”, of the instant routing of fuel line 59 through the vanes, strut(s) and bearing, only the vane(s) 58 is exposed to the hot combustor gasses exiting combustor 80 enroute to turbine 62,64 (see Harris ‘733 fig. 5), and the fuel duct 59 is disposed within the vane 58 along with air. Thus the fuel duct is isolated or separated from the hot combustion gasses. Harris ‘733 does not disclose the fuel duct being thermally isolated (this is interpreted as the fuel duct being somewhat insulated; for applicant par. 46, top recites that the turbine vane 128 is cooled by the fuel and thus there is some heat exchange between the vane and the fuel duct such that there is not complete thermal isolation).
Berry teaches a gas turbine 10 (see fig. 4) and further teaches a fuel duct being thermally isolated (see par. 102, bottom).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Harris ‘962 and White with fuel can be thermally isolated from hot combustor gasses as taught by Berry in order to facilitate preventing fuel coking (see Berry par. 102).
Harris ‘946 teaches (see fig. 1) a gas turbine 10 and further teaches directing fuel 61 through an aft bearing (see fig. 4 identifying aft bearing 51).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Harris ‘733 in view of Nilsson, Mazeaud, Harris ‘962, White and Berry with directing fuel through the aft bearing as taught by Harris ‘946 in order to facilitate 11 cooling the bearing (see Harris ‘946 col. 1, ll. 20-25).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 of the instant application 19/201,164 (“the patent application”) are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 (12/11/2025 claim set as modified by examiner’s amendment in 03/25/2026 Not. of Allow.) of copending Application No. 19/201,188 (“the reference application”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the reference application includes all of the limitations of claim 1 of and also includes additional limitations. Thus the reference application claim 1 is narrower than the patent application claim 1 and therefore anticipates the patent application claim 1. In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 at 2012 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Regarding claim 1 of the patent application, the reference application claim 1 claims a gas turbine engine comprising: a compressor configured to receive inlet air at a compressor inlet and generate compressed air at a compressor exit; a combustor positioned fluidically and physically downstream of the compressor, wherein the combustor is fluidically connected to the compressor to receive a first portion of the compressed air as combustor primary inlet air and wherein the combustor comprises: a toroidal recirculation zone configured to receive and combust fuel in a rich combustion zone; an ignitor positioned to ignite an air/fuel mixture in the rich combustion zone; a quench zone downstream of the toroidal recirculation zone, wherein the quench zone is configured to receive and quench with quench air combustion products from the rich combustion zone; a lean combustion zone downstream of the quench zone, wherein the lean combustion zone is configured to complete combustion of the fuel and to generate hot combustor exhaust gas; and a cooling air flow path configured to direct a second portion of the compressed air around an outer combustor liner to cool the outer combustor liner and to provide a source of the quench air, inner combustor liner cooling air, fuel injector air, and combustor secondary inlet air; a turbine positioned fluidically and physically downstream of the combustor, wherein the turbine is fluidically connected to the compressor to receive the hot combustor exhaust gas; a shaft mechanically connecting the turbine and the compressor, wherein the shaft is configured to: transmit rotational energy from the turbine to the compressor to power the compressor, wherein the shaft connects the turbine to the compressor through an annulus formed by the combustor surrounding the shaft; and pump the fuel from a fuel source to the combustor through a fuel duct in the shaft; and a shaft cooling air pump positioned in the cooling air flow path, wherein the shaft cooling air pump is configured to further compress at least a portion of the second portion of the compressed air flowing through the cooling air flow path before the at least a portion of the second portion of the compressed air enters the combustor as the fuel injector air and the combustor secondary inlet air.
Claim 7 of the patent application provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the reference application in view of Calder. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct because the claims of the reference application in view of prior art reference Calder make obvious the claims of the patent application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding claim 7 of the patent application, the reference application does not claim the quench zone further comprises a plurality of inner diameter (ID) quench tubes to receive ID quench air and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) quench tubes 17b,17c to receive OD quench air.
Calder teaches a plurality of inner diameter (ID) quench tubes 17b,17c to receive ID quench air (the air cools the combustion gasses and surrounding structure; see col. 1, ll. 20-25 and col. 2, ll. 20-25) and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) quench tubes to receive OD quench air (the air cools the combustion gasses and surrounding structure; see col. 1, ll. 20-25 and col. 2, ll. 20-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the reference application with the rapid quench zone further comprises a plurality of inner diameter (ID) quench tubes to receive ID quench air and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) quench tubes 17b,17c to receive OD quench air as taught by Calder in order to facilitate preventing damage to the turbine inlet nozzle due to high temperature combustion gasses (see Calder col. 1, ll. 20-25).
Claim 8 of the patent application provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the reference application in view of Harris ‘862 and Dasbach. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct because the claims of the reference application in view of prior art references Harris ‘862 and Dasbach make obvious the claims of the patent application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding claim 8 of the patent application, the reference application does not claim the lean combustion zone further comprises a plurality of inner diameter (ID) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive ID inner combustor liner cooling air and a plurality of outer diameter (OD) inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive OD inner combustor liner cooling air.
Harris ‘862 teaches (see figs. 2-4) a gas turbine 10 and further teaches a lean combustion zone D further comprises a plurality of OD inner combustor liner cooling air tubes 72 to receive OD inner combustor liner cooling air (see “COMPRESSOR DISCHARGE AIR” in fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the patent application with the lean combustion zone 86 further comprises a plurality of OD inner combustor liner cooling air tubes to receive OD inner combustor liner cooling air as taught by Harris ‘862 in order to facilitate high combustion efficiency with reliable stability at cruise and other portions of the flight envelope (see Harris ‘862 col. 1, ll. ll. 35-45).
Dasbach teaches a gas turbine (see col. 1, ll. 30-35) and further teaches (see fig. 1) a lean combustion zone (the fuel enters at location 25 and thus the combustion much downstream thereof would be a lean zone) comprises a plurality of ID combustor liner cooling air holes 23 near location 15.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the patent application in view of Harris ‘862 with the plurality of ID combustor liner cooling air holes as taught by Dasbach in order to facilitate high combustion efficiency.
Claim 9 of the patent application provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of the reference application in view of Harris ‘862. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct because the claims of the reference application in view of prior art reference Harris ‘862 make obvious the claims of the patent application.
Regarding claim 9 of the patent application, claim 5 of the reference application claims a plurality of hollow 1st stage turbine vanes positioned between the combustor and the turbine; an aft bearing surrounding the shaft immediately upstream of the turbine, wherein the aft bearing is configured to provide structural support for the shaft when it rotates in operation; and a plurality of hollow struts positioned between the plurality of hollow 1st stage turbine vanes and the aft bearing, wherein the plurality of hollow struts are configured to provide structural support for the aft bearing. The reference application does not claim wherein the hollow 1st stage turbine vanes are configured to remove the bulk circumferential swirl created in the lean combustion zone before the combustor hot exhaust gas enters the turbine.
Harris ‘862 teaches (see figs. 3-4) a bulk circumferential swirl (swirl created from canted tubes 72; see col. 4, ll. 60-67, and see fig. 5 showing example swirling flow) created in a lean combustion zone D.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the patent application with the bulk circumferential created in the lean combustion zone as taught by Harris ‘862 in order to facilitate high combustion efficiency with reliable stability at cruise and other portions of the flight envelope (see Harris ‘862 col. 1, ll. ll. 35-45). Because the instant vanes guide the flow into the turbine any bulk swirl would be removed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 13-17, 19 and 20 would be allowable once the claim objections in the Claims Objections section above are implemented.
Claims 12 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The closest prior art Harris ‘733 in view of Mazeaud does not teach in combination with the other claim limitations:
In the independent claim 11, a combustor for a gas turbine engine comprising the outer combustor liner is further configured to engage with a shaft cooling air pump. An outer combustor liner configured to engage with a shaft cooling air pump was not found in the prior art. Mazeaud teaches a cooling air pump in a cooling air flow path as discussed in the 103 claim 1 analysis above. Ross (US 1,941,141) teaches a screw lubricant pump engaging with an outer wall but does not teach missing limitation above. Engaging pump with the combustor lines obviates the need for a pump wall (see wall 112c in applicant fig. 7D) enclosing the pump (compare applicant figs. 7C and 7D) and thus reduces complexity and weight that translates into improves fuel efficiency. Dependent claims 12-20 would be allowable based on their respective dependency upon an allowable base claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered, but a new combination of references were used to reject the claims and therefor the arguments were moot.
Regarding the 112(a) written description rejection of claim 17 applicant argues that the specification par. 48 states “Further, the positioning of the ID quench tubes 126a and OD quench tubes 126b can be selected to fluidically isolate the rich combustion zone 104a from the rapid quench zone 104b”. However literal support for an original claim in the specification does not necessarily equate to a showing of possession of invention under 35 USC 12(a). “For example, Claim 18 communicates that rapid quench zone is fluidically isolated from the rich combustion zone (i.e., see claim 18 recitation “fluidically isolate the rich combustion zone from the rapid quench zone”). In the gas turbine arts fluids are either fluidically isolated from each other or in fluid communication with each other. Applicant par. 47 states that “combustion products from the rich combustion zone 104a … flow into the [rapid] quench zone 104b and mix with OD quench air 130c from OD quench tubes 126b and ID quench air 130h from ID quench tubes 126a”. Therefore, it appears that the rapid quench zone is in fluid communication with the rich combustion zone by way of the combustion products flowing from the rich combustion zone to the quench zone. Thus one of ordinary skill would not understand that there was possession of invention regarding the instant claim 18 limitation because the combustion zone and rapid quench zone are in fluid communication with each other rather than fluidically isolated from each other.
Regarding the 112(b) rejection of claims 2 and 12 “Applicant submits that the addition of ‘to provide a desired flow residence time in the rich combustion zone’ provides sufficient definiteness to the claims.” In response, this is an intended result of providing of making the height of the toroidal recirculation zone being roughly the height of the compressor inlet. This does not further aid the public in understanding how to avoid infringing the limitation “roughly a height of the compressor inlet” because roughly is a term of degree and no standard is provided in applicant disclosure as to the metes and bounds of “roughly” as explained in the 112(b) section above.
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 MARC J AMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-9948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/MARC AMAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3741 /DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights