DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of the species of Fig. 85, allegedly directed to claims 1-15 in the reply filed on 11/11/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that some of the identified species can be examined together without a serious burden of examination. This is not found persuasive because each species depicts mutually exclusive characteristics. These characteristics require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Furthermore, the search and/or examination burden is not limited exclusively to a prior art search but also includes that effort required to apply the art by making and discussing all appropriate grounds of rejection. Multiple species, such as those in the present application, normally require additional reference material and further discussion for each additional species examined. Concurrent examination of multiple species would thus typically involve a significant burden even if all searches were coextensive.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration (as indicated by Applicant) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claims 6 and 8-9 are further withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species (the species of Figs. 87 and 86, respectively), there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Turnquist et al. (US5971400).
PNG
media_image1.png
359
351
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Turnquist teaches a turbine engine defining a circumferential direction, comprising: a rotor (14); a stator comprising a carrier (16); a seal assembly (10) disposed between the rotor and the stator, the seal assembly comprising a plurality of seal segments (22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32) supported at least in part by the carrier, the plurality of seal segments having a first seal segment (22) and a second seal segment (24), the first and second seal segments each having a seal face (44) forming a fluid bearing with the rotor; and a seal support assembly comprising a tangential spring extension (40) extending between the first seal segment and the second seal segment for biasing the first seal segment away from the second seal segment in the circumferential direction, wherein the tangential spring extension is a bent plate spring (see Fig. 7, for example).
Regarding claim 2, Turnquist teaches the tangential spring extension defines in part a first point of contact (generally 22) with the first seal segment and a second point of contact (generally 40) with the second seal segment.
Regarding claim 3, Turnquist teaches the tangential spring extension defines a length along an axial direction of the turbine engine between 5% and 100% of an axial length of the seal face of the first seal segment (Fig. 1 shows the axial length is within the claimed range).
PNG
media_image2.png
477
593
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Turnquist teaches the bent plate spring includes a middle section (see annotated figure), a first segment extending between the middle section and a first end, and a second segment extending between the middle section and a second end (See annotated figure).
Regarding claim 5, Turnquist teaches the middle section includes a ledge (the middle section is ledge shaped).
Regarding claim 7, Turnquist teaches the bent plate spring is fixedly coupled to the first seal segment at the first end and to the second seal segment at the second end (Turnquist teaches the spring is engaged in grooves in the seal segments).
Regarding claim 10, Turnquist teaches the identical elements from claim 1, and further teaches the tangential spring extension is engaged with the carrier to support the seal assembly (the springs push circumferentially which also pushes the carrier radially outward).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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.
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Turnquist in view of Brandon (US4436311) and Johnson (US2008/0136115).
Regarding claims 11-14, Turnquist teaches the turbine engine of claim 10, but fails to teach the seal support assembly includes a pin fixedly or slidably coupled to the carrier, and wherein the tangential spring extension is engaged with the pin.
In an analogous art, Brandon teaches a turbine seal support. Brandon teaches a pin (26) fixed to the seal carrier, with a spring (16) engaged with the pin.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the turbine engine of Turnquist and change it so that the seal support assembly includes a pin fixedly or slidably coupled to the carrier, and wherein the tangential spring extension is engaged with the pin to provide radial support and securement of the spring.
Turnquist as modified fails to teach the seal support assembly includes a radial spring, and wherein the tangential spring extension is engaged with the pin through the radial spring, wherein the radial spring is positioned inward of the carrier along a radial direction of the turbine engine, wherein the radial spring is positioned at least partially outward of the carrier along a radial direction of the turbine engine.
In an analogous art, Johnson teaches a turbine sealing arrangement. Johnson teaches a radial spring (113) pushes the seal segment (210) toward a rotor (122), and allows for radial expansion or displacement of the sealing segment away from the rotor (see paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the turbine engine of Turnquist and change it so that the seal support assembly includes a radial spring, and wherein the tangential spring extension is engaged with the pin through the radial spring, wherein the radial spring is positioned inward of the carrier along a radial direction of the turbine engine, wherein the radial spring is positioned at least partially outward of the carrier along a radial direction of the turbine engine as taught by Johnson to allow for radial expansion or displacement of the sealing segment away from the rotor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US references 10794208, 2018/0119559, 8413993, 6588764, 6572114, 6502823, 6220603, 5934684, 5810365 and 5395124 teach circumferential spring biasing arrangements for turbine seals.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMERON A CORDAY whose telephone number is (571)272-0383. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Courtney Heinle can be reached on (571) 270-3508. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CAMERON A CORDAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745