DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final rejection in response to amendments filed 10/28/25. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14,16-18 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1-13, 17-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusnierek et al. (US 2020/0123982) in view of Sheridan et al. (US 2017/0234232) and further in view of Thompson et al. (US 7104072).
Regarding independent claim 21, Kusnierek teaches an engine starter assembly for a turbine engine having an engine core having a compression section 106, combustion section 108, and turbine section 110 in serial flow arrangement, the engine core having an engine drive shaft [0028], the engine starter assembly comprising:
an output drive shaft selectively coupled to the engine drive shaft [0029];
an air turbine starter (ATS) 330 operably coupled to the output drive shaft; and
an electric motor 328 coupled to the ATS and being configured to drive at least a portion of ATS and the output drive shaft [0041].
Kusnierek teaches the ATS but is silent to the ATS being selectively coupled to a supply of air through a starter air valve (SAV) and operating the SAV to provide air from the supply of air to the ATS to drive the engine drive shaft through the output drive shaft.
Sheridan teaches an ATS 120 being selectively coupled to a supply of air through a starter air valve (SAV) 116A. Sheridan teaches it was known to control the air flow in the ATS [0059].
It is noted that the use of a known prior art structure (in this case the use of a starter air valve as taught by Sheridan), to obtain predictable results (in this case to control the fluid flow through the ATS of Kusnierek) was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR; MPEP 2141 III A.
Kusnierek in view of Sheridan teaches a controller but is silent to a controller to control, at least in part, starting the turbine engine by:
operating the electric motor to drive the engine drive shaft through the output drive shaft such that the engine drive shaft is driven via the ATS and the electric motor simultaneously.
Thompson teaches it was known to have a controller to control, at least in part, starting the turbine engine by:
operating the electric motor to drive the engine drive shaft through the output drive shaft such that the engine drive shaft is driven via the ATS and the electric motor simultaneously (col. 2, l. 65 – col.3 l. 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to modify Kusnierek in view of Sheridan with the operation of the ATS and electric motor simultaneously to start the engine, as taught by Thompson. Thompson teaches reduced size, weight, and cost (col.3 l. 1-3).
Regarding dependent claim 2, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches wherein the ATS and the electric motor are provided outside of the engine core (see figure 1 showing AGB 114 outside of the engine core).
Regarding dependent claim 3, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches comprising a clutch selectively coupling the electric motor to at least one of the ATS or the output drive shaft [0041].
Regarding dependent claim 4, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Sheridan further teaches further comprising a controller module configured to selectively control an operation of at least one of the ATS and the electric motor to control at least one of a rotational speed or a torque of the output drive shaft [0059-0060].
Regarding dependent claim 5, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Sheridan further teaches wherein the set of sensors provide an input including the measurements to the controller module, and the controller module controls at least one of the SAV or the electric motor based on the input [0058-0060].
Regarding dependent claim 6, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Sheridan further teaches wherein the set of sensors includes at least one sensor that is operably coupled to the engine core, the at least one sensor providing the input to the controller indicative of a temperature of the engine core, and wherein the electric motor is configured to at least partially drive the output drive shaft to supply a flow of cooling fluid to the engine core based on the input from the at least one sensor [0079, 0090].
Regarding dependent claim 7, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Sheridan further teaches wherein the turbine engine further comprises a fan section 22, and wherein the flow of cooling fluid is an ambient air drawn in from the fan section [0079]. This would be the case as ambient air is being drawn into the engine by the fan section.
Regarding dependent claim 8, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches further wherein the engine starter assembly is provided exterior the engine core (see figure 1 showing AGB 114 outside of the engine core).
Regarding dependent claim 9, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches comprising an accessory gear box 114 selectively couplable to the ATS to the engine drive shaft.
Regarding dependent claim 10, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches wherein the controller is further configured to start the turbine engine by:
continuously supplying, during startup of the turbine engine, the air from the supply of air to the ATS;
continuously driving, during startup of the turbine engine, and by the supplying of air from the supply of air to the ATS, the engine drive shaft through the output drive shaft; and selectively driving, by the electric motor, the engine drive shaft through the output drive shaft [0060].
Regarding dependent claim 11, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches wherein the controller is further configured to start the turbine engine by:
driving, at least partially by the electric motor, the output drive shaft by selectively coupling, through a clutch, one of the output drive shaft or the ATS to the electric motor [0033].
Regarding dependent claim 12, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches wherein the controller is configured to control an output of the electric motor [0047].
Regarding dependent claim 13, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Sheridan further teaches further comprising driving, after catching the engine drive shaft and in response to the sensed temperature of the turbine engine and at least partially by the electric motor, the engine drive shaft through the output drive shaft until a sensed temperature of the turbine engine is within a threshold temperature value [0079, 0090-0091].
Regarding claim 17, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thompson further teaches wherein the operating the SAV to provide air from the supply of air to the ATS to drive the engine drive shaft through the output drive shaft includes continuously providing air from the supply of air to the ATS such that the ATS is continuously driving the output drive shaft (col. 2, l.65 – col. 3, l.3). The start up sequence teaches the continuous provision of air to the ATS to maintain starter rotation and drive the output shaft until the engine reaches self-sustaining speed.
Regarding claim 18, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches wherein the controller is further configured to control the electric motor to adjust a speed or a torque of the output drive shaft [0047].
Regarding claim 20, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and further in view of Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek further teaches wherein the electric motor is rotatably coupled to a turbine drive shaft of the ATS; and wherein a turbine member comprising a set of airfoils is coupled to and rotates with the turbine drive shaft [0058].
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson and further in view of Rambo (US 2017/0370291).
Regarding claim 14, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson is silent to wherein the controller is further configured to, after shutting down the turbine engine, control a supply of a cooling fluid to at least a portion of the turbine engine.
Rambo teaches it was known to have a cooling fluid channeled to the turbine engine after shutting down the turbine engine [0033].
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide the engine of Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson with the controller having the cooling system of Rambo, as Rambo teaches improved service life, limiting degradation and coking of fluids and deformation of rotating components and faster engine restart times [0041].
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson and further in view of Gentile et al. (US 2017/0370294).
Regarding claim 16, Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson is silent to wherein the controller is further configured to determine that the flow of air to the ATS is insufficient to generate a torque through the output drive shaft to start the turbine engine.
Gentile teaches it was known to have the controller is further configured to determine that the flow of air to the ATS is insufficient to generate a torque through the output drive shaft to start the turbine engine [0062].
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to modify the engine of Kusnierek in view of Sheridan and Thompson with the sensor and controller of Gentile as Gentile teaches safety and preventing damage [0068-0069].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15 and 19 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRAIG SANG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1418. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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.
/CRAIG KIM/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights