DETAILED ACTION
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 6 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.
Claim 6 recites the term “substantially follows” which is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially follows” 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. Although the specification discloses examples where the protrusions could have a D-shaped or J-shaped profile. Said shape profiles examples do not clarify what “substantially follows” since the claim does not recite and the specification does not provide any guidance as to how a person of ordinary skills can determine what combinations of shapes between the protrusion and cavity and/or if there is a threshold of how close or far from, for example a cavity shape contour, the shape of the protrusion must be within to satisfy the claim limitation.
Claim 6 further recites the limitation “the shape”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites “A stator shroud structure [for a fluid flow machine (intended use)] comprising a stator and a first rotor” (emphasis added). The claim recitations render the claim indefinite since the claim is directed to a stator shroud structure comprising both a stator and a first rotor.
Clarification and/or amendment is respectfully requested.
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) 1-2 and 6-14 (as far as the claim(s) are definite and understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weaver (US 20090324394 A1; also US 7,918,643 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Weaver teaches a fluid flow machine (Fig.1/2) comprising a first rotor (6) and a stator (20/22) positioned alongside the first rotor, each of the first rotor and the stator comprising a plurality of circumferentially distributed turbomachine blades (2/20),
wherein the stator comprises a stator shroud structure (31) comprising a stator shroud surface (upper surface of 31) and the first rotor comprises a first rotor shroud structure (8) comprising a first rotor shroud surface (upper surface of 8), the stator shroud surface and first rotor shroud surface together at least partially defining a radially inner flow surface of the fluid flow machine (Fig.1),
wherein the first rotor shroud structure defines a first cavity (36), the first cavity being disposed radially inward of the first rotor shroud surface, the stator shroud structure comprises a first protrusion (Fig.2, mislabeled as “8” but should be labeled as “42” as per ¶26), the first protrusion being disposed radially inward of the radially inner flow surface (Fig.1/2), wherein the first protrusion extends in a direction with an axial component and into the first cavity of the first rotor shroud structure (Fig.1/2), and wherein the first protrusion is resiliently deformable (¶28, note “the sealing rings 38 are made from a material which is sufficiently flexible to enable them, or at least the lips 42, to deflect over the blade platforms 8, 12 as the stator assembly is installed”).
Regarding claim 2, Weaver further teaches the first protrusion is resiliently deformable such that the first protrusion is resiliently deformed by an axial edge of the first rotor shroud structure when the stator is radially moved into position during assembly or moved out of position during disassembly (¶28, note “the sealing rings 38 are made from a material which is sufficiently flexible to enable them, or at least the lips 42, to deflect over the blade platforms 8, 12 as the stator assembly is installed”).
Regarding claim 6, Weaver further teaches the first protrusion substantially follows the shape of the first cavity (Fig.1/2, note this claim is indefinite and under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the first protrusion of Weave substantially follows the shape of the first cavity since the first protrusion extends into the first cavity).
Regarding claim 7, Weaver further teaches the first protrusion extends beyond an axial edge of the first rotor shroud structure such that a distal end of the first protrusion is set back from the axial edge of the first rotor shroud structure when the stator is in an installed position relative to the first rotor (Fig.1/2; ¶28).
Regarding claim 8, Weaver further teaches the stator shroud structure comprises a shroud ring (22; ¶23) that supports turbomachine blades of the stator.
Regarding claim 9, Weaver further teaches the first protrusion extends from a first end face of the shroud ring (from left end face of 26).
Regarding claim 10, Weaver further teaches the fluid flow machine comprises a seal (16/34) between the stator shroud structure and the first rotor shroud structure.
Regarding claim 11, Weaver further teaches the fluid flow machine further comprises a second rotor (10) comprising a plurality of circumferentially distributed turbomachine blades (4), the stator being positioned between the first and second rotors (Fig.1),
wherein the second rotor comprises a second rotor shroud structure (12) comprising a second rotor shroud surface (upper surface of 12), the stator shroud surface and first and second rotor shroud surfaces together at least partially defining the radially inner flow surface of the fluid flow machine (Fig.1),
wherein the second rotor shroud structure defines a second cavity (Fig.1, unlabeled), the second cavity being disposed radially inward of the second rotor shroud surface (Fig.1), and
wherein the stator shroud structure comprises a second protrusion (Fig.1, protrusion of 38 on the right), the second protrusion being disposed radially inward of the radially inner flow surface (Fig.1), wherein the second protrusion extends in a direction with an axial component and into the second cavity of the second rotor shroud structure (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 12, Weaver further teaches a stator shroud structure (Fig.1/2) for a fluid flow machine comprising a stator (20/22) and a first rotor (6), the stator shroud structure being configured to support a plurality of circumferentially distributed turbomachine blades (20),
wherein the stator shroud structure comprises a stator shroud surface (upper surface of 31) at least partially defining a radially inner flow surface of the fluid flow machine (Fig.1),
wherein the stator shroud structure comprises a first protrusion (Fig.2, mislabeled as “8” but should be labeled as “42” as per ¶26), the first protrusion being disposed radially inward of the radially inner flow surface (Fig.1/2), wherein the first protrusion extends in a direction with an axial component and beyond an edge of the stator shroud surface (Fig.1/2).
Regarding claim 13, Weaver further teaches a compressor (¶2), turbine, gas turbine engine (¶1), vehicle or aircraft comprising the fluid flow machine of claim 1 (see claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 14, Weaver further teaches a method of assembling (¶28) a fluid flow machine (Fig.1/2) comprising a first rotor (6) and a stator (20/22) positionable alongside the first rotor, each of the first rotor and the stator comprising a plurality of circumferentially distributed turbomachine blades (2/20),
wherein the stator comprises a stator shroud structure (31) comprising a stator shroud surface (upper surface of 31) and the first rotor comprises a first rotor shroud structure (8) comprising a first rotor shroud surface (upper surface of 8), the stator shroud surface and first rotor shroud surface together at least partially defining a radially inner flow surface of the fluid flow machine (Fig.1),
wherein the first rotor shroud structure defines a first cavity (36), the first cavity being disposed radially inward of the first rotor shroud surface (Fig.1), and
wherein the stator shroud structure comprises a first protrusion (Fig.2, mislabeled as “8” but should be labeled as “42” as per ¶26), the first protrusion being disposed radially inward of the radially inner flow surface (Fig.1/2),
the method comprising positioning the stator such that the first protrusion extends in a direction with an axial component and into the first cavity of the first rotor shroud structure (¶28).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Barton et al – hereafter Barton – (US 6,514,045 B1).
Regarding claim 3, Weaver teaches all the limitations of claim 1, see above, however, does not explicitly teach the first protrusion is formed from a fibre-reinforced silicone rubber.
Barton teaches seals (Fig.4/5, 30) for a turbomachine, the seals protruding from a shroud structure (22). Barton further teaches the seal being formed from a fibre-reinforced (33; column 3 line 22-25) silicone rubber (32; column 2 line 49); said configuration provides a reinforced and seal construction for added strength (column 3 line 22-25).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the fluid flow machine of Weaver by having the first protrusion is formed from a fibre-reinforced silicone rubber based on the teachings of Barton because this configuration provides a reinforced and seal construction for added strength.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Care et al – hereafter Care – (US 20090269203 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Weaver teaches all the limitations of claim 1, see above, however, does not explicitly teach the first protrusion is at least partially hollow.
Care teaches seal elements (Fig.1/3, 40) for a turbomachine. Care further teaches a seal element having a first protrusion (41/43) which is at least partially hollow (¶37, note “41, 43 are preferably are filled with a low density foam material”); said configuration allows providing a light weight core to facilitate the transfer of load between walls of the hollow protrusion (¶37).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the fluid flow machine of Weaver by having the first protrusion is at least partially hollow based on the teachings of Care because this configuration allows providing a light weight core to facilitate the transfer of load between walls of the hollow protrusion.
Regarding claim 5, Weaver and Care further teach the first protrusion comprises a foam filler provided in the hollow of the first protrusion (Care ¶37).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN G FLORES whose telephone number is (571)272-3486. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5:30pm Pacific Time.
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, Nathan E Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUAN G FLORES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights