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 Group I and Species 4 in the reply filed on 06/22/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-5, 7, 12-17 and 19 are examined. Claims 9-11 are withdrawn. Claims 6 and 18 are withdrawn, as such claims pertain to Species 2. Claims 8 and 20 are withdrawn, as such claims pertain to Species 3. Group I can be made by a materially different process because the cooling fan housing structure of Group I does not require machining and additively manufacturing as associated with Group II. Therein, the process of making the cooling fan housing can be used to make another and materially different product than the cooling fan housing of Group I.
The species restriction is maintained because each species illustrates a different structure. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record. Further, the prior art applicable to one species would not likely be applicable to another species and would require more time and search queries to find the additional features in other prior art, which establishes a search and examination burden on the examiner.
For such reasons, the restriction/election requirement is therefore deemed proper and is made FINAL.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancellation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Interpretations
The term “tight-fitting condition” recited in claim 1 and claim 12 is interpreted according to the definition provided in the specification in [0045], wherein the term “flush condition” can be interpreted as a “tight-fitting condition”. Therein, the terms tight-fitting and flush are interchangeable.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 12-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olver et al. (US 2008/0053059 A1) in view of Tanno et al. (U.S. 11,280,223).
Regarding claim 1, Olver et al. discloses a cooling fan housing (cooling housing shown in Fig. 2, [0002], [0003]), comprising:
an inner housing (31) comprising inner forward (“iF" shown in Fig. 2’ below) and inner rearward flanges (“iR", flanges 45 disclosed in [0023], lines 3-6) on either side of an inner annulus (44); and
an outer housing (60, which comprises 34) comprising outer forward (“oF”, Fig. 5’ below) and outer rearward (“oR") flanges on either side of an outer annulus (i.e., outer annulus formed by top perimeter of flanges 45 shown in Fig. 4), the outer and inner forward flanges being attachable in a first tight-fitting condition (i.e., via mounting screws/bolts through mounting holes of flanges 45 of the inner housing 31, [0023], lines 4-10).
PNG
media_image1.png
500
814
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2’
PNG
media_image2.png
524
669
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 5’
Olver et al. does not specifically disclose the inner rearward flange comprising a recessed portion proximate to the inner annulus and a non-recessed portion remote from the inner annulus and the outer rearward flange and the non-recessed portion of the inner rearward flange being attachable in a second tight-fitting condition with the recessed portion of the inner rearward flange forming a gap with the outer rearward flange and with an attachment location of the outer rearward flange and the non-recessed portion of the inner rearward flange being rearward of the gap.
Tanno et al. teaches of fastening of case structures for turbomachines (Col. 2, lines 45-47), which is within the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Specifically, Tanno et al. teaches of a flange fastening structure (Fig. 1A and Fig. 1B) via a bolt fastening structure (100), which is analogous to the bolt fastening structure disclose in Olver et al. Tanno et al. teaches of an inner rearward flange (105) comprising a recessed portion (110) proximate to the inner annulus (i.e., the recess 110 is closer to the annulus Q enclosed by 101 and 102 than portion 115 of lower flange 105, as shown In Fig. 1B) and a non-recessed portion (outer non-recessed portion 115 of lower flange 105) remote from the inner annulus, and the outer rearward flange (104) and the non-recessed portion (115) of the inner rearward flange being attachable in a second tight-fitting condition (i.e., via the bolt 106, 108 configuration, the fastening force is enhanced and the hermeticity is improved, Col. 2, lines 45-47, Col. 1, lines 30-50) with the recessed portion (110) of the inner rearward flange forming a gap with the outer rearward flange (as taught in Fig. 1B, there is a gap created by the recess 110 between the inner rearward flange and the outer rearward flange). Tanno et al. further teaches of an attachment location (i.e., at location W2 in Fig. 1B) of the outer rearward flange (104) and the non-recessed portion (outer non-recessed portion 115 of lower flange 105, specifically, portion 104b) of the inner rearward flange (105) being rearward of the gap (i.e., portion 104b is rearward (i.e., downstream) of the gap created by the recess 110, as shown In Fig. 1B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Olver et al. in view of Tanno et al. by incorporating the recess fastening structure taught in Tanno et al. into the mating flanges disclosed in Olver et al. because such configuration the fastening force between the two flanges of the turbomachine casing structure is enhanced and therein the hermeticity is improved (Col. 2, lines 45-47, Col. 1, lines 30-50).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. further discloses wherein the inner housing (Olver, 31) comprises: radial walls (“R”, Fig. 2’) defining the sides of the inner annulus (44, as shown in Fig. 2); and a horizontal member (“H”, Fig. 2’) extending from a forward one of the radial walls (i.e., horizontal portions “H” extend from a corresponding radial wall “R”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. further discloses wherein at least one of rivets, bolts and a weld to attach at least the outer and inner forward flanges (Olver, bolts, [0023]; Tanno, bolt structure shown in Fig. 1B).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. further discloses of an aspect ratio (i.e., via the proportions of the length of the flange 105 taught in Tanno et al., Fig. 1B and the height of the gap (i.e., the height of the recess 110 taught in Fig. 1B)).
The combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the aspect ratio of the gap is 10 or more to 1.
However, the Applicant has not disclosed that having the aspect ratio of the gap is about 10 or more to 1 (see paragraph [0049] of Applicant’s specification, wherein the same limitation is recited without specific reasoning or criticality) solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose. From Fig. 1B’ of Tanno, the relative proportions of the length of the flange to the height of the gap in Fig. 1B is comparative to the design shown in Fig. 3 of Applicant’s drawings. Therein, it appears that relative proportions taught by Tanno et al. would perform equally well with the relative proportions of the length of the flange to the height of the gap as claimed by the Applicant. Therein, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, wherein the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device (see MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A)).
Regarding claim 12, Olver et al. discloses a cooling fan housing (cooling housing shown in Fig. 2, [0002], [0003]), comprising:
a first housing (31) comprising a first forward flange (“iF" shown in Fig. 2’) and a first rearward flange (“iR", flanges 45 disclosed in [0023], lines 3-6) on either side of a first annulus (44); and
a second housing (60, which comprises 34) comprising a second forward flange (“oF”, Fig. 5’) and a second rearward flange (“oR") on either side of a second annulus (i.e., outer annulus formed by top perimeter of flanges 45 shown in Fig. 4),
wherein:
the first and the second forward flanges are attachable in a first tight-fitting condition (i.e., via mounting screws/bolts through mounting holes of flanges 45 of the inner housing 31, [0023], lines 4-10).
Olver et al. does not specifically disclose wherein at least one of the first and the second rearward flanges comprises a recessed portion proximate to the first and second annuluses and a non-recessed portion remote from the first and second annuluses, and the non-recessed portion of the at least one of the first and the second rearward flanges are attachable in a second tight-fitting condition, with the recessed portion of the at least one of the first and the second rearward flanges forming a gap and with an attachment location of the non-recessed portion of the at least one of the first and the second rearward flanges being rearward of the gap.
Tanno et al. teaches of fastening of case structures for turbomachines (Col. 2, lines 45-47), which is within the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Specifically, Tanno et al. teaches of a flange fastening structure (Fig. 1A and Fig. 1B) via a bolt fastening structure (100), which is analogous to the bolt fastening structure disclose in Olver et al. Tanno et al. teaches of an inner rearward flange (105) comprising a recessed portion (110) proximate to the inner annulus (i.e., the recess 110 is closer to the annulus Q enclosed by 101 and 102 than portion 115 of lower flange 105, as shown In Fig. 1B) and a non-recessed portion (outer non-recessed portion 115 of lower flange 105) remote from the inner annulus, and the outer rearward flange (104) and the non-recessed portion (115) of the inner rearward flange being attachable in a second tight-fitting condition (i.e., via the bolt 106, 108 configuration, the fastening force is enhanced and the hermeticity is improved, Col. 2, lines 45-47, Col. 1, lines 30-50) with the recessed portion (110) of the inner rearward flange forming a gap with the outer rearward flange (as taught in Fig. 1B, there is a gap created by the recess 110 between the inner rearward flange and the outer rearward flange). Tanno et al. further teaches of an attachment location (i.e., at location W2 in Fig. 1B) of the outer rearward flange (104) and the non-recessed portion (outer non-recessed portion 115 of lower flange 105, specifically, portion 104b) of the inner rearward flange (105) being rearward of the gap (i.e., portion 104b is rearward (i.e., downstream) of the gap created by the recess 110, as shown In Fig. 1B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Olver et al. in view of Tanno et al. by incorporating the recess fastening structure taught in Tanno et al. into the mating flanges disclosed in Olver et al. because such configuration the fastening force between the two flanges of the turbomachine casing structure is enhanced and therein the hermeticity is improved (Col. 2, lines 45-47, Col. 1, lines 30-50).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. further discloses wherein at least one of the first housing and the second housing comprises integral stator vanes (the second housing comprises heat exchanger 34, which comprises metal fins (i.e., vanes), Olver, [0021], fourth-to-last line that are integral to the heat exchanger structure of the second housing 60).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. further discloses wherein the first housing (Olver, 31) comprises: radial walls (“R”, Fig. 2’) defining the sides of the inner annulus (44, as shown in Fig. 2); and a horizontal member (“H”, Fig. 2’) extending from a forward one of the radial walls (i.e., horizontal portions “H” extend from a corresponding radial wall “R”).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. further discloses wherein at least one of rivets, bolts and a weld to attach at least the outer and inner forward flanges (Olver, bolts, [0023]; Tanno, bolt structure shown in Fig. 1B).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. further discloses of an aspect ratio (i.e., via the proportions of the length of the flange 105 taught in Tanno et al., Fig. 1B and the height of the gap (i.e., the height of the recess 110 taught in Fig. 1B)).
The combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the aspect ratio of the gap is 10 or more to 1.
However, the Applicant has not disclosed that having the aspect ratio of the gap is about 10 or more to 1 (see paragraph [0049] of Applicant’s specification, wherein the same limitation is recited without specific reasoning or criticality) solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose. From Fig. 1B’ of Tanno, the relative proportions of the length of the flange to the height of the gap in Fig. 1B is comparative to the design shown in Fig. 3 of Applicant’s drawings. Therein, it appears that relative proportions taught by Tanno et al. would perform equally well with the relative proportions of the length of the flange to the height of the gap as claimed by the Applicant. Therein, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, wherein the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device (see MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A)).
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olver et al. (US 2008/0053059 A1) in view of Tanno et al. (U.S. 11,280,223), and further in view of Veitch et al. (US 2017/0241434 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. discloses wherein the inner housing is made of metal (Olver, [0017]) and wherein the outer housing is made of metal ([0021]). However, the combination does not specifically disclose wherein the inner and outer housings comprise materials having different coefficients of thermal expansion (CTEs).
Veitch et al. teaches of turbomachine casing materials, which is within the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Specifically, Veitch et al. teaches that different cases can be made of different materials that have different thermal expansion coefficients ([0002], lines 11-13). For instance, a case material can be made from magnesium and another case material can be titanium ([0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Olver et al. and Tanno et al. in view of Veitch et al. by having the inner and outer housings be made from different metal materials having different coefficients of thermal expansions as taught in Veitch et al., because such material selection allows for each of the different housings to expand and contract in response to variations in the temperature during operation of the turbomachine, therein preventing unwanted stresses due to unexpected expansion or contraction from changes in temperature in the housing material.
Regarding claim 19, see claim 7 rejection above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 16 are 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.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest wherein respective dimensions of the outer and inner forward flanges are different from respective dimensions of the outer and inner rearward flanges. The prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest of different dimensions of the forward flanges with regards to the rearward flanges, as shown in Fig. 2 of Applicant’s drawings. Any modification thereof to obtain the recited claimed subject matter would result from improper hindsight reasoning.
Claim 16 is allowable for the same reasons set forth in claim 4 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7928. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am- 5:00 pm EST alternating Fridays off.
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 at (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.
/ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 07/01/2026
Prosecution Insights