Appeal 2007-0950
Application 11/099,264
among other things, an injector “to inject a fluidized material of solid
particles suspended in a fluid into the plasma jet” of a plasma spray gun,
wherein the “fluid stream can be a carrier gas of the plasma forming gas,”
and the particles are injected into the plasma jet right before or after exit
from the gun (id. 5). The Examiner concludes it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Strutt to inject the liquid/particle
suspension into the plasma of the plasma spray device as suggested by
Peterson because Peterson teaches introducing the suspension into the
plasma jet of the plasma spray gun (id. 6; see also 13-14 and 16-17).
With respect to the second ground of rejection, the Examiner finds the
combination of Strutt and Peterson does not teach, among other things,
“separately injecting particulate thermal barrier coating constituents not in
liquid through a separate injector to the plasma jet,” and the size of the
constituent particles (Answer 6). The Examiner finds Gambino teaches,
among other things, a first spray stream of “composite particulate materials
not suspended in liquid,” which particles can have a particle size of 20 to
200 microns, and a second stream of smaller particles suspended in liquid
separately injected from a separate injector system (id. 7, citing Gambino,
e.g., ¶¶ 0028, 0030, and 0043-0045, and Fig. 5; see also Answer 22-23 and
25-26). The Examiner finds Gambino to be analogous art because the
problem of plasma thermal spraying using particles suspended in liquid is
reasonably pertinent to the particular problem faced by Appellants and
further addressed by Strutt (Answer 21-22). The Examiner concludes it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the
combined teachings of Strutt and Peterson to provide separate injection of
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013