Office Action 1: Non-Final Rejection (2025-02-25)
Rejection types: 103 - Obviousness, 112 - Written Description/Enablement

CLAIMS:
What Is Claimed Is:
1\. An apparatus to regulate a gaseous fuel system, the apparatus comprising: a first valve connected to a fuel supply line, the first valve including: a first plug to control a flow of fuel; a first spring coupled to a first end of the first plug; and a first magnet coupled to a second end of the first plug; a second valve connected to a purge system in parallel with the fuel supply line, the second valve including: a second plug to control a flow of a fluid; a second spring coupled to a first end of the second plug; and a second magnet coupled to a second end of the second plug, the second magnet magnetically coupled to the first magnet; and an actuator coupled to at least one of the first or the second valve.
2\. The apparatus of claim 1, further including a third valve upstream of the second valve, the third valve including: a third plug to control the flow of the fluid; and a third spring coupled to a first end of the third plug.
3\. The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the actuator is a first actuator, and the apparatus further including a second actuator, the second actuator coupled to the third valve.
4\. The apparatus of claim 3, wherein the second actuator is controlled by a controller, the controller to signal the second actuator to actuate when an engine overspeed state is determined.
5\. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first valve and the second valve are upstream of a combustor in an engine.
6\. The apparatus of claim 5, further including a three-way valve downstream of the first valve and the second valve, the three-way valve upstream of the combustor.
7\. The apparatus of claim 6, wherein the three-way valve is coupled to a vent stack.
8\. The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the three-way valve is controlled by a controller, the controller to open a flow from the first valve to the combustor when the engine is in a run state.
9\. The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the three-way valve is controlled by a controller, the controller to open a flow from the second valve to the vent stack when the engine is in at least one of a shut off state or an overspeed state.
10\. A system to reduce fuel combustion, the system comprising: a controller to determine an operating state of an engine; a first valve of a fuel metering system connected to a fuel supply line, the first valve controlled by the controller based on the operating state; and a second valve of a purge system connected to the fuel supply line, the second valve in parallel with the first valve, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve.
11\. The system of claim 10, wherein a configuration of the first valve is changed by an actuator.
12\. The system of claim 10, further including a third valve upstream of the second valve, the third valve to control a flow of non-flammable, pressurized fluid based on a signal sent by the controller, the signal sent by the controller based on the determined operating state of the engine.
13\. The system of claim 12, wherein an actuator of the third valve is controlled by the controller to adjust configuration of the third valve.
14\. The system of claim 10, wherein the first valve and the second valve are upstream of a combustor in an engine.
15\. The system of claim 14, further including a three-way valve downstream of the first valve and the second valve, the three-way valve upstream of the combustor.
16\. The system of claim 15, wherein the three-way valve is coupled to a vent stack.
17\. The system of claim 16, wherein the three-way valve is controlled by the controller, the controller to open a flow from the first valve, close the three-way valve to the vent stack, and to open the three-way valve to the combustor when the engine is in a running state.
18\. The system of claim 17, wherein the three-way valve is controlled by a controller, the controller to close a fuel flow from the first valve, close the three-way valve to the combustor, and open the three way valve to the vent stack when the engine is in at least one of a shut off state or overspeed state.
19\. A system for controlling fuel flow to a combustor, the system comprising: a means for determining an engine state; a first means for controlling a supply of fuel, the first means controlled by the engine state determined; and a second means for controlling a supply of non-flammable, pressurized fluid.
20\. The system of claim 19, wherein the second means is magnetically coupled to the first means so that when the first means actuates, the second means actuates.

OFFICE ACTION:
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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1, the limitation “the first or the second valve” should be “the first valve or the second valve”.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “an engine” should be “the engine.  Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17, the limitation “a controller” should be “the controller”.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.  The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A)	the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following limitations are interpreted under the 112(f) paragraph:
A means for determining an engine state, as interpreted in para. [0079] as a FADEC or known equivalents;
A first means for controlling a supply of fuel;
A second means for controlling a supply of non-flammable pressurized fluid.
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 19-20 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.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “a first means for controlling a supply of fuel” and “a second means for controlling a supply of non-flammable, pressurized fluid” render the claim indefinite because the specification does not clearly describe the structure associated therewith. The specification does disclose first and second valves but does not adequately describe that the first and second means are the first and second valves or what other structure does or does not read on the term.
Claims dependent thereon are rejected for the same reasons.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA  to pre-AIA ) 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, 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) 10-11, 14, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jansen US 6,050,081 in view of Williams US 2024/0068404
Regarding claim 10, Jansen discloses a system to reduce fuel combustion, the system comprising: a first valve, the portion of 30 regulating the flow from 16 of a fuel metering system connected to a fuel supply line, the line connected to input 16; and a second valve, the portion of 30 regulating the flow from 12 of a purge system connected to the fuel supply line the second valve in parallel with the first valve, the lines are parallel to each other through outlet 23. Jansen is not relied upon to teach a controller to determine an operating state of an engine; the first valve controlled by the controller based on the operating state, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve.
Williams teaches a controller 15 to determine an operating state of the valve, i.e. of the engine, see para. [0024], the valve is controlled by the controller, see para. [0025], the electromagnetic device fine controls the fluid passing therethrough, the first and second ends of the valve are coupled via a magnetic assembly 122, 126. The system provides a satisfactory passive valve and adjustments to the flow therethrough. See para. [0004].
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled worker to replace the actuator 36 of Jansen with passive valve and control of Williams to control the fuel and purge lines of Jansen and make adjustments to the flow therethrough. Id. Williams states that conventional fuel valves are often passively balanced where it would have been obvious to utilize a passive valve in order to obviate the need for compressed air actuation in line 38.
Regarding claim 11, Jansen, in view of Williams, discloses a configuration of the first valve is changed by an actuator. See electromagnetic actuator 114 that allows for adjustments to the position of the valve.
Regarding claims 14, Jansen, in view of Williams, discloses the first and second valves are upstream of a combustor in the engine. Jansen teaches the outlet 23 leads to the combustion chamber of the turbine. See col. 2, lines 61-end.
Regarding claim 19, referring to claim 10 above, as best understood, Jansen, in view of Williams discloses all elements including the means for determining an engine state, see Williams controller 15, a first means as claimed, the valve associated with 16,  a second means as claimed, the valve associated with 12.
Regarding claim 20, Jansen, in view of Williams, discloses the second means is magnetically coupled to the first means so that when the first means actuates, the second means actuates. See Williams fig. 1, the magnets 126, 122 control the position of the valve where when implemented into Jansen, would magnetically couple the first and second means to cause actuation of both.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jansen, in view of Williams, as applied to claim10 above above, and further in view of Murakami US 2013/0091824.
Regarding claim 12, Jansen, in view of Williams, discloses all elements except a third valve upstream of the second valve, the third valve to control a flow of non-flammable, pressurized fluid on a signal sent by the controller, the signal sent by the controller based on the determined operating state of the engine
Murakami teaches a first and second valve 22 a, b, that controls the flow of sweep air into the system is controlled based on the operational conditions of the gas turbine. See para. [0103]. Murakami teaches that a plurality of sweep air valves may be provided to control the sweep air which provide redundancy. See para. [0229].
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled worker to provide a third valve 22b upstream of the second valve of Jansen, in view of Williams, as taught by Murakami, in order to provide redundancy. Id. The valves of Jansen, in view of Williams and Murukami are controlled based on the determined operating state of the engine (i.e. the need for fuel) to control a flow of non-flammable, pressurized fluid, i.e. air.
Regarding claim 13, Jansen, in view of Williams and Murukami, discloses the third valve is controlled by the controller to adjust configuration of the third valve. Williams teaches a controller controls the operation of the first and second valves and Murukami teaches that the valves 22a, 22b should be controlled to move between the on and off positions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 are allowed.
Claims 15-18 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not teach or fairly suggest a first spring coupled to a first end of the first plug, a first magnet coupled to a second end of the first plug, a second spring coupled to a first end of the second plug, and a second magnet coupled to a second end of the second plug, the second magnet magnetically coupled to the first magnet in combination with the remaining elements of claim 1. The prior art is aware of combination air purging fuel valves as shown by Jansen. The prior art is also aware of magnetically actuated valves as disclosed by Williams among others. However, no arrangement of the prior art appears to teach or fairly suggest the spring and the magnet of the valves being arrange on a first and second end of the plugs of the first and second plug to magnetically couple each other thereto.
With regard to claim 15, the prior art does not appear to teach or fairly suggest a three-way valve downstream of the first valve and the second valve, the three-way valve upstream of the combustor. Rather, the closest prior art of record appears to dump the purge fluid through the combustor.
Claims dependent thereon inherit the basis for allowability.
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.”
Conclusion

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS
The applicant has carefully considered the Office action dated February 3, 2025, and the references cited therein. By way of this response, claims 1, 14, 18, and 19 have been amended and claim 20 has been canceled without prejudice to its future prosecution. Additionally, a substitute specification is submitted herewith. No new matter has been added. All pending claims are in condition for allowance. Reconsideration is respectfully requested.
Claim Objections
The Office action objects to claims 1, 14, and 181 as allegedly including informalities. These objections are traversed. However, in the interest of advancing prosecution, claims 1, 14, and 18 have been amended to obviate these objections. Reconsideration is respectfully requested.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
The Office action rejects claims 19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as allegedly
indefinite. Particularly, the Office action alleges that the specification does not clearly describe which structures correspond to the "a first means for controlling a supply of fuel" and "a second means for controlling a supply of non-flammable, pressurized fluid." These rejections are traversed. However, in the interest of advancing prosecution, a substitute specification is submitted herewith to obviate these objections. Particularly, new paras. [0055], [0063], and [0082] have been added to indicate that the first means corresponds to at least the flame out vent valve 204 of FIG. 2, the flame out vent valve 404 of FIG. 4, and the flame out vent valve 602 of FIG. 6. Additionally, new paras. [0055], [0063], and [0082] indicate that the second means
17 includes an informality. The Applicant believes the Office action means to
ncludes the quoted language at issue.
correspond to the purge valve 206 of FIG. 2, the purge valve 406 of FIG. 4, and the purge valve 604 of FIG. 6. Support for new para. [0055] can be found in at least paragraphs [0046] and [0050] of the specification as filed. Support for new para. [0063] can be found in at least paragraphs [0057] and [0063] of the specification as filed. Support for new para. [0082] can be found in at least paragraphs [0070], [0073], and [0074] of the specification as filed. No new matter has been added.
The Allowed Subject Matter
In the Office action, claims 1-9 are identified as allowed. The Office action also identifies claims 15-18 would be allowed if rewritten in independent form. The Applicant thanks the Examiner for his examination efforts and identification of the allowed subject matter.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
The Office action rejects claims 10, 11, 14, 19, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
allegedly unpatentable over Jansen (U.S. Patent No. 6,050,081) in view of Williams (U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2024/0068404). The Office action rejects claims 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly unpatentable over Jansen in view of Williams and in further view of Murakami (U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2013/0091824). All art-based rejections are traversed.
Independent Claim 10
Independent claim 10 sets forth a system including a second valve of a purge system
connected to the fuel supply line, the second valve in parallel with a first valve, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve. As acknowledged in the Office action, Jansen "is not
relied upon to teach a controller to determine an operating state of an engine; the first valve controlled by the controller based on the operating state, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve." The Office action, p. 6, (emphasis added). The Applicant agrees that Jansen provides not teach or suggestion of a controller to determine an operating state of an engine; the first valve controlled by the controller based on the operating state, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve
Williams does not overcome the deficiencies of Jansen. Williams generally mentions: "[A] system includes an injector having a scheduling valve assembly and a nozzle in fluid communication with the valve assembly." Williams, Abstract. Williams further mentions:
The electromagnetic device 114 includes a permanent magnet 122 mounted on the valve spool 116. An electromagnet 124, e.g. electromagnetic coil, is mounted to the valve assembly 104 proximate to the permanent magnet 122 for selectively applying a force to the permanent magnet 122 to adjust position of the valve spool
116 within the valve assembly using electrical current applied to the electromagnet 124. The first permanent magnet 122 and the first
electromagnet 124 are mounted proximate a downstream end of the valve
assembly 104, i.e. to the right as oriented in FIG. 1. The electromagnetic device 114 includes a second permanent magnet 126 mounted to the valve spool 116 at a position upstream relative to the first permanent magnet 122, i.e. to the left as
oriented in FIG. 1. A second electromagnet 128 is mounted to the valve
assembly 104 proximate the second permanent magnet 126 at a position in the
valve assembly upstream relative to the first electromagnet 124.
Williams, para. [0023]. That is, Williams generally mentions two pairs of electromagnets and permanent magnets mounted on opposite ends of a valve spool 116. The magnets 122, 124, 126, 128 of Williams are depicted in FIG. 1 of Williams:

Fig. 1
Williams, FIG. 1 (annotations added). As clearly described in paragraph [0023] and clearly illustrated in FIG. 1, the permeanant magnets 122, 126 of Williams are to a single valve spool. That is, the permanent magnets 122, 126 do not couple two valves together and instead enable: "the position of the valve spool 116 within the valve assembly 104 to be adjusted to the left or the right as oriented in FIG. 1 ... depending on whether current is applied to the first or second electromagnets 124, 128." Williams, para. [0024]. Accordingly, the permanent magnets of Williams do
n
ot
magnetically couple a second valve to a first valve. In fact, Williams does not disclose a system including multiple valves, much less a second valve magnetically coupled to a first valve, as set forth in claim 10.
Because each of Jansen and Williams is missing the same elements of claim 10, namely, a second valve of a purge system connected to the fuel supply line, the second valve in parallel with a first valve, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve, the alleged Jansen/ C_ combination is missing those same elements. Therefore, the Jansen/Williams combination fails to establish aprimafacie case of obviousness of the method of claim 10. Withdrawal of the § 103 rejections of claim 10 and all claims dependent thereon is respectfully requested.
Independent Claim 19
Independent claim 19 sets forth a system for controlling fuel flow to a combustor, the
system comprising a second means for controlling a supply of non-flammable, pressurized fluid, the second means is magnetically coupled to the first means so that when the first means actuates, the second means actuates. The alleged Jansen/Williams combination does not teach or suggest such a system. Thus, withdrawal of the § 103 rejections of claim 10 and all claims dependent thereon is respectfully requested.
Conclusion

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: 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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.  The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A)	the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following limitations are interpreted under the 112(f) paragraph:
A means for determining an engine state, as interpreted in para. [0079] as a FADEC or known equivalents;
A first means for controlling a supply of fuel, as interpreted in para. [0055];
A second means for controlling a supply of non-flammable pressurized fluid, as interpreted in para. [0055].
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 (i.e., changing from AIA  to pre-AIA ) 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, 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) 10-11, 14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jansen US 6,050,081 in view of Williams US 2024/0068404
Regarding claim 10, Jansen discloses a system to reduce fuel combustion, the system comprising: a first valve, the portion of 30 regulating the flow from 16 of a fuel metering system connected to a fuel supply line, the line connected to input 16; and a second valve, the portion of 30 regulating the flow from 12 of a purge system connected to the fuel supply line the second valve in parallel with the first valve, the lines are parallel to each other through outlet 23. Jansen is not relied upon to teach a controller to determine an operating state of an engine; the first valve controlled by the controller based on the operating state, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve.
Williams teaches a controller 15 to determine an operating state of the valve, i.e. of the engine, see para. [0024], the valve is controlled by the controller, see para. [0025], the electromagnetic device fine controls the fluid passing therethrough, the first and second ends of the valve are coupled via a magnetic assembly 122, 126. The system provides a satisfactory passive valve and adjustments to the flow therethrough. See para. [0004].
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled worker to replace the actuator 36 of Jansen with passive valve and control of Williams to control the fuel and purge lines of Jansen and make adjustments to the flow therethrough. Id. Williams states that conventional fuel valves are often passively balanced where it would have been obvious to utilize a passive valve in order to obviate the need for compressed air actuation in line 38.
Regarding claim 11, Jansen, in view of Williams, discloses a configuration of the first valve is changed by an actuator. See electromagnetic actuator 114 that allows for adjustments to the position of the valve.
Regarding claims 14, Jansen, in view of Williams, discloses the first and second valves are upstream of a combustor in the engine. Jansen teaches the outlet 23 leads to the combustion chamber of the turbine. See col. 2, lines 61-end.
Regarding claim 19, referring to claim 10 above, as best understood, Jansen, in view of Williams discloses all elements including the means for determining an engine state, see Williams controller 15, a first means as claimed, the valve associated with 16,  a second means as claimed, the valve associated with 12, and further discloses the second means is magnetically coupled to the first means so that when the first means actuates, the second means actuates. See Williams fig. 1, the magnets 126, 122 control the position of the valve where when implemented into Jansen, would magnetically couple the first and second means to cause actuation of both, the first means is interpreted as a flame out vent valve or known equivalents, and the second means is a purge valve or known equivalents.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jansen, in view of Williams, as applied to claim10 above above, and further in view of Murakami US 2013/0091824.
Regarding claim 12, Jansen, in view of Williams, discloses all elements except a third valve upstream of the second valve, the third valve to control a flow of non-flammable, pressurized fluid on a signal sent by the controller, the signal sent by the controller based on the determined operating state of the engine
Murakami teaches a first and second valve 22 a, b, that controls the flow of sweep air into the system is controlled based on the operational conditions of the gas turbine. See para. [0103]. Murakami teaches that a plurality of sweep air valves may be provided to control the sweep air which provide redundancy. See para. [0229].
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled worker to provide a third valve 22b upstream of the second valve of Jansen, in view of Williams, as taught by Murakami, in order to provide redundancy. Id. The valves of Jansen, in view of Williams and Murukami are controlled based on the determined operating state of the engine (i.e. the need for fuel) to control a flow of non-flammable, pressurized fluid, i.e. air.
Regarding claim 13, Jansen, in view of Williams and Murukami, discloses the third valve is controlled by the controller to adjust configuration of the third valve. Williams teaches a controller controls the operation of the first and second valves and Murukami teaches that the valves 22a, 22b should be controlled to move between the on and off positions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 are allowed.
Claims 15-18 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not teach or fairly suggest a first spring coupled to a first end of the first plug, a first magnet coupled to a second end of the first plug, a second spring coupled to a first end of the second plug, and a second magnet coupled to a second end of the second plug, the second magnet magnetically coupled to the first magnet in combination with the remaining elements of claim 1. The prior art is aware of combination air purging fuel valves as shown by Jansen. The prior art is also aware of magnetically actuated valves as disclosed by Williams among others. However, no arrangement of the prior art appears to teach or fairly suggest the spring and the magnet of the valves being arrange on a first and second end of the plugs of the first and second plug to magnetically couple each other thereto.
With regard to claim 15, the prior art does not appear to teach or fairly suggest a three-way valve downstream of the first valve and the second valve, the three-way valve upstream of the combustor. Rather, the closest prior art of record appears to dump the purge fluid through the combustor.
Claims dependent thereon inherit the basis for allowability.
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 filed 5/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the prior art applied above, the Applicant argues that the prior art is missing the same elements of claim 10 namely a second valve of a purge system connected to the fuel supply line, the second valve in parallel with a first valve, the second valve magnetically coupled to the first valve. Additionally, that Williams generally mentions two pairs of electromagnets and permanent magnets mounted at opposite ends. The Examiner disagrees.
Jansen teaches the first and second valves as claimed but does not disclose a magnetic coupling. Williams teaches that a magnetic actuator is useable to actuate a valve. Thus, when combined together, the magnetic actuator would be coupling the actuation of the two valves together. Thus, the deficiency identified in Jasen is cured by the teachings of Williams. The claims only require that the second valve and the first valve be magnetically coupled together, which the prior art teaches by magnetic actuation. The claims do not require the magnetic to be located at any particular location as required in claim 1 for example. Thus, the inclusion of a magnetic actuator in the apparatus of Jansen would result in the actuation of the first and second valve being magnetically coupled to each other since the movement of both valve are tied to each other.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US6050081A: Claims:
A purging fuel valve for a turbine engine having lines providing pressurized fuel, pressurized hot purge air from the engine, and having a fuel line leading to a combustion area of the engine, the valve comprising: a first annular seal dividing an air chamber receiving the source of pressurized hot air from an outlet chamber communicating with the fuel line; a second annular seal positioned in opposition along a spool axis from the first annular seal and dividing the outlet chamber from a fuel chamber receiving the source of pressurized fuel; a spool extending along the spool axis to move therealong, the spool having a center section: (i) closing the first annular seal while allowing fuel flow through the second annular seal at a first position along the spool axis, (ii) closing the second annular seal while allowing hot purging air through the first annular seal at a second position along the spool axis, (iii) closing both the first and second annular seals at a third position between the first and second positions; whereby fuel coking of the outlet chamber is reduced.
a first annular seal dividing an air chamber receiving the source of pressurized hot air from an outlet chamber communicating with the fuel line;
a second annular seal positioned in opposition along a spool axis from the first annular seal and dividing the outlet chamber from a fuel chamber receiving the source of pressurized fuel;
a spool extending along the spool axis to move therealong, the spool having a center section: (i) closing the first annular seal while allowing fuel flow through the second annular seal at a first position along the spool axis, (ii) closing the second annular seal while allowing hot purging air through the first annular seal at a second position along the spool axis, (iii) closing both the first and second annular seals at a third position between the first and second positions; whereby fuel coking of the outlet chamber is reduced.
(i) closing the first annular seal while allowing fuel flow through the second annular seal at a first position along the spool axis,
(ii) closing the second annular seal while allowing hot purging air through the first annular seal at a second position along the spool axis,
(iii) closing both the first and second annular seals at a third position between the first and second positions; whereby fuel coking of the outlet chamber is reduced.
whereby fuel coking of the outlet chamber is reduced.
The purging fuel valve of claim 1 including a stop within the fuel and air chambers and wherein the spool contacts a respective stop at the first and second positions to limit further motion of the spool and wherein the spool is freely movable in response to pressure on the spool from the hot purge air and pressurized fuel; whereby the spool moves to close the fuel line or hot purge air line in the absence of pressure eliminating the need for check valves in the purge air and fuel lines.
whereby the spool moves to close the fuel line or hot purge air line in the absence of pressure eliminating the need for check valves in the purge air and fuel lines.
The purging fuel valve of claim 1 including further a spring biasing the spool to the second position.
The purging fuel valve of claim 1 including further an actuator cylinder having a shaft extending along the spool axis from the fuel chamber to bias the spool toward the first position when the actuator cylinder is actuated.
The purging fuel valve of claim 4 wherein the actuator cylinder includes a spring biasing the shaft away from the spool when the actuator cylinder is not actuated.
Ref US20130091824A1: Claims:
A gas turbine comprising: a gas-turbine fuel nozzle that includes a plurality of fuel supply channels to which fuel is supplied, a plurality of fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels to which fuel or a scavenging fluid for scavenging the fuel is supplied, and a plurality of injection holes that are provided at downstream ends of the fuel supply channels or the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels and that inject the fuel or the scavenging fluid guided from the fuel supply channels or the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels; a scavenging-fluid supply channel that is connected to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels and guides the scavenging fluid; and scavenging-fluid cooling means for cooling the scavenging fluid to a temperature lower than a self-ignition temperature of the fuel.
a gas-turbine fuel nozzle that includes a plurality of fuel supply channels to which fuel is supplied, a plurality of fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels to which fuel or a scavenging fluid for scavenging the fuel is supplied, and a plurality of injection holes that are provided at downstream ends of the fuel supply channels or the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels and that inject the fuel or the scavenging fluid guided from the fuel supply channels or the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels;
a scavenging-fluid supply channel that is connected to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels and guides the scavenging fluid; and
scavenging-fluid cooling means for cooling the scavenging fluid to a temperature lower than a self-ignition temperature of the fuel.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , wherein the scavenging-fluid supply channel is connected to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels and to a casing of the gas turbine and guides, as the scavenging fluid, a fluid extracted from the casing; and the scavenging-fluid cooling means is a plurality of projections that are provided around the scavenging-fluid supply channel.
wherein the scavenging-fluid supply channel is connected to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels and to a casing of the gas turbine and guides, as the scavenging fluid, a fluid extracted from the casing; and
the scavenging-fluid cooling means is a plurality of projections that are provided around the scavenging-fluid supply channel.
A gas turbine according to claim 2 , wherein the plurality of projections are provided close to suction ports for ventilation fans provided on a gas-turbine outer case that encloses the gas turbine.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , wherein the scavenging-fluid supply channel is connected to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels and to a casing of the gas turbine and guides, as the scavenging fluid, a fluid extracted from the casing; and the scavenging-fluid cooling means is heat-exchange means that is provided in the scavenging-fluid supply channel and that performs heat exchange between a cooling medium and the scavenging fluid.
the scavenging-fluid cooling means is heat-exchange means that is provided in the scavenging-fluid supply channel and that performs heat exchange between a cooling medium and the scavenging fluid.
A gas turbine according to claim 4 , wherein the heat-exchange means is a gas-turbine cooling-air cooler; and the scavenging fluid is part of the fluid cooled by the gas-turbine cooling-air cooler.
wherein the heat-exchange means is a gas-turbine cooling-air cooler; and
the scavenging fluid is part of the fluid cooled by the gas-turbine cooling-air cooler.
A gas turbine according to claim 4 , wherein the heat-exchange means is of a water cooling type that uses water as the cooling medium.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , wherein the scavenging-fluid cooling means is a compressor that supplies compressed air to the scavenging-fluid supply channel as the scavenging fluid.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , further comprising, on an upstream side of the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels, a fuel-flow-rate control valve that controls the flow rate of the fuel, a fuel-pressure control valve that controls the pressure of the fuel, and atmospheric discharge means that is provided at a portion between the fuel-flow-rate control valve and the fuel-pressure control valve and that discharges, to the atmosphere, the scavenging fluid that has been guided to the portion between the fuel-flow-rate control valve and the fuel-pressure control valve.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , wherein the scavenging-fluid supply channel comprises a scavenging-fluid supply on-off valve on a downstream side of the scavenging-fluid cooling means and a scavenging-fluid discharge channel that extends from a portion between the scavenging-fluid cooling means and the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valve; the scavenging-fluid discharge channel comprises a scavenging-fluid discharge on-off valve; and when the gas turbine is started-up, the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valve is completely closed, and the scavenging-fluid discharge on-off valve is completely opened.
wherein the scavenging-fluid supply channel comprises a scavenging-fluid supply on-off valve on a downstream side of the scavenging-fluid cooling means and a scavenging-fluid discharge channel that extends from a portion between the scavenging-fluid cooling means and the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valve;
the scavenging-fluid discharge channel comprises a scavenging-fluid discharge on-off valve; and
when the gas turbine is started-up, the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valve is completely closed, and the scavenging-fluid discharge on-off valve is completely opened.
A gas turbine according to claim 9 , wherein the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves are provided at two positions on the downstream side of the scavenging-fluid discharge channel; a scavenging-fluid depressurizing channel extends from a portion of the scavenging-fluid supply channel between the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves; the scavenging-fluid depressurizing channel comprises a scavenging-fluid depressurizing on-off valve that is operated in conjunction with actuation of at least one of the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves; and the scavenging-fluid depressurizing on-off valve is completely opened when at least one of the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves is completely closed.
wherein the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves are provided at two positions on the downstream side of the scavenging-fluid discharge channel;
a scavenging-fluid depressurizing channel extends from a portion of the scavenging-fluid supply channel between the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves;
the scavenging-fluid depressurizing channel comprises a scavenging-fluid depressurizing on-off valve that is operated in conjunction with actuation of at least one of the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves; and
the scavenging-fluid depressurizing on-off valve is completely opened when at least one of the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves is completely closed.
A gas turbine according to claim 9 , further comprising: degree-of-opening detection means that is provided in the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves for detecting the degrees-of-opening thereof; and a control device that has a load reduction function for reducing an operating load on the gas turbine and an emergency stop function for stopping the operation of the gas turbine, wherein the control device activates the emergency stop function and/or the load reduction function when the control device determines that the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves are in abnormal states based on the degrees-of-opening detected by the degree-of-opening detection means.
degree-of-opening detection means that is provided in the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves for detecting the degrees-of-opening thereof; and
a control device that has a load reduction function for reducing an operating load on the gas turbine and an emergency stop function for stopping the operation of the gas turbine,
wherein the control device activates the emergency stop function and/or the load reduction function when the control device determines that the scavenging-fluid supply on-off valves are in abnormal states based on the degrees-of-opening detected by the degree-of-opening detection means.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , further comprising: temperature detection means that is provided on the downstream side of the scavenging-fluid cooling means and detects the temperature of the scavenging fluid taken out from the scavenging-fluid cooling means; and a control device that has a load reduction function for reducing the operating load on the gas turbine, wherein the control device operates the load reduction function when the control device determines that the temperature of the scavenging fluid detected by the temperature detection means is equal to or higher than a self-ignition temperature of the fuel.
temperature detection means that is provided on the downstream side of the scavenging-fluid cooling means and detects the temperature of the scavenging fluid taken out from the scavenging-fluid cooling means; and
a control device that has a load reduction function for reducing the operating load on the gas turbine,
wherein the control device operates the load reduction function when the control device determines that the temperature of the scavenging fluid detected by the temperature detection means is equal to or higher than a self-ignition temperature of the fuel.
A gas turbine according to claim 10 , wherein an orifice is provided on a downstream side of the scavenging-fluid discharge on-off valve or on a downstream side of the scavenging-fluid depressurizing on-off valve.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , wherein the gas-turbine fuel nozzle is a pilot nozzle to which gaseous fuel is guided as the fuel, the gaseous fuel that is combusted by a diffusion method is supplied to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels, and the gaseous fuel that is combusted by a premix method is supplied to the fuel supply channels.
A gas turbine according to claim 12 , wherein, at the time of load rejection, the control device stops the supply of the scavenging fluid and increases the flow rate of the fuel that is combusted by a premix method and that is supplied to the fuel supply channels.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , wherein the gas-turbine fuel nozzle is a dual-fuel firing pilot nozzle to which gaseous fuel or liquid fuel is guided as the fuel, the gaseous fuel that is combusted by a diffusion method is supplied to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels, and the liquid fuel that is combusted by the diffusion method is supplied to the fuel supply channels.
A gas turbine according to claim 1 , wherein the gas-turbine fuel nozzle is a main nozzle in which gaseous fuel that is combusted by a premix method is supplied to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels, as the fuel, or the scavenging fluid is supplied to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels; and a plurality of the main nozzles are provided, and the scavenging fluid is supplied to some of the main nozzles according to the operation of the gas turbine.
wherein the gas-turbine fuel nozzle is a main nozzle in which gaseous fuel that is combusted by a premix method is supplied to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels, as the fuel, or the scavenging fluid is supplied to the fuel/scavenging-fluid supply channels; and
a plurality of the main nozzles are provided, and the scavenging fluid is supplied to some of the main nozzles according to the operation of the gas turbine.
A gas-turbine plant comprising a gas turbine according to claim 1 .
A gas-turbine plant according to claim 18 , further comprising a gas-turbine outer case that encloses the gas turbine.
Ref US20240068404A1: Claims:
A system comprising: an injector including a scheduling valve assembly and a nozzle in fluid communication with the valve assembly, wherein the scheduling valve assembly is configured for regulation of flow from an inlet of the injector to the nozzle; and an electromagnetic device operatively connected to a hydromechanical valve spool of the valve assembly to selectively adjust position of the valve spool in the valve assembly.
an injector including a scheduling valve assembly and a nozzle in fluid communication with the valve assembly, wherein the scheduling valve assembly is configured for regulation of flow from an inlet of the injector to the nozzle; and
an electromagnetic device operatively connected to a hydromechanical valve spool of the valve assembly to selectively adjust position of the valve spool in the valve assembly.
The system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the injector includes two fluid circuits between the inlet of the injector and two respective outlets of the nozzle for staged flow output from the nozzle, wherein a first one of the two fluid circuits is a primary circuit, and wherein a second one of the two fluid circuits is a secondary circuit
The system as recited in claim 2 , wherein the valve spool is biased to a closed position by one or more biasing members of the scheduling valve assembly, wherein the valve spool is configured to regulate flow from the inlet of the injector to each of the primary and secondary circuits, and wherein the valve spool includes a scheduling surface configured to vary flow area through the secondary circuit based on position of the valve spool within the scheduling valve assembly.
The system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the electromagnetic device includes: a permanent magnet mounted on the valve spool; and an electromagnet mounted to the valve assembly proximate to the permanent magnet for selectively applying a force to the permanent magnet to adjust position of the valve spool within the valve assembly.
a permanent magnet mounted on the valve spool; and
an electromagnet mounted to the valve assembly proximate to the permanent magnet for selectively applying a force to the permanent magnet to adjust position of the valve spool within the valve assembly.
The system as recited in claim 4 , wherein the permanent magnet is a first permanent magnet, wherein the electromagnet is a first electromagnet, wherein the first permanent magnet and the first electromagnet are mounted proximate a downstream end of the valve assembly, and wherein the electromagnetic device includes: a second permanent magnet mounted to the valve spool at a position upstream relative to the first permanent magnet; and a second electromagnet mounted to the valve assembly proximate the second permanent magnet at a position in the valve assembly upstream relative to the first electromagnet.
a second permanent magnet mounted to the valve spool at a position upstream relative to the first permanent magnet; and
a second electromagnet mounted to the valve assembly proximate the second permanent magnet at a position in the valve assembly upstream relative to the first electromagnet.
The system as recited in claim 5 , wherein the first permanent magnet and first electromagnet have respective polarities and axial spacing relative to one another configured to pull the valve spool toward a downstream direction with application of DC current to the first electromagnet.
The system as recited in claim 6 , wherein the second permanent magnet and second electromagnet have respective polarities and axial spacing relative to one another configured to pull the valve spool in an upstream direction with application of DC current to the second electromagnet.
The system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the electromagnetic device includes a linear electromagnetic motor including: a stator mounted to stationary relative to the injector, wherein the stator includes a plurality of electromagnetic coils spaced apart from one another along a motion axis of the valve spool; and a linear rotor mounted to the valve spool, wherein the linear rotor includes at least one permanent magnet positioned within the stator, wherein the stator and linear rotor are configured to adjust position of the valve spool within the valve assembly based on electrical currents supplied to the plurality of electromagnetic coils.
a stator mounted to stationary relative to the injector, wherein the stator includes a plurality of electromagnetic coils spaced apart from one another along a motion axis of the valve spool;
[Truncated to input limit]