Appeal No. 2004-0453
Application No. 09/828,019
The turbine nozzle segment of Lee corresponds to the turbine nozzle segment
defined by appealed independent claim 19 in all respects except for the claim
requirement “said second section being newly manufactured.” In Lee’s turbine nozzle
segment, both the first and second sections are previously used. As correctly indicated
by the examiner, however, Mendham discloses removing a damaged portion of a used
turbine vane assembly and replacing this damaged portion with a member cut from a
blank, wherein the blank “may be scrapped nonengine run castings (scrapped for defects
outside the area to be used) or from independently manufactured insert blanks (used
when scrape castings are not available or when base material is not castable)” (column 5,
lines 60-64). Thus, Mendham discloses an embodiment wherein the repaired turbine
vane assembly includes a previously used part and a newly manufactured part. It is the
examiner’s position that it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the
art to modify Lee’s turbine nozzle segments so that one of the sections thereof is newly
manufactured rather than previously used in view of Mendham’s aforenoted teachings.
In this way, a turbine nozzle segment could be manufactured during the circumstances
when a first previously used section is available, but a complementary second previously
used section is not available, that is, “when scrap castings are not available” for the
complementary second section pursuant to the teachings of Mendham (column 5, lines
63-64).
The appellants argue that the above discussed combination proposed by the
examiner would be contrary to Lee’s disclosure wherein only salvaged or previously used
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007