Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/207,136

POWER CONVERSION SYSTEM INCLUDING ENGINE AND HEAT EXCHANGER

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jun 07, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, ANDREW H
Art Unit
3741
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
662 granted / 882 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+43.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
909
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
46.6%
+6.6% vs TC avg
§102
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
§112
28.8%
-11.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 882 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . DETAILED ACTION Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Species VII in the reply filed on 4/4/25 is acknowledged. Claims 2, 4-5, 7-10 are withdrawn. It is noted that the amendments to claims 5 and 7 make the claims drawn to a non-elected invention (Fig 13 including a pressure flange). Therefore, claim 5 is now also withdrawn and claims 7-10 remain withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1, 3, 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. “generating heat energy from fission nuclear reactions” was not originally disclosed. The original disclosure fails to teach fission nuclear reactions. 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. Claim 1 is 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. “the heated air flow”, “the outlet of the first expander”, “the inlet of the second engine chamber”, “the discharge chamber”, and “the second engine chamber outlet” lacks antecedent basis. Claim 3 and 6 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. “the shaft” (claim 3) and “the rotating shaft” (claim 6) are indefinite because it is unclear which shaft is being referred to. Furthermore, a first rotating shaft was defined in claim 1. Therefore, “a first shaft” (claim 3) is indefinite because it is unclear how it relates to the first rotating shaft of claim 1. Furthermore in claim 3, “the expander” is indefinite because it is unclear which expander is being referred to. Furthermore, a first expander was defined in claim 1. Therefore, “a first expander” (claim 3) is indefinite because it is unclear how it relates to the first expander of claim 1. Furthermore in claim 3, “a second shaft” and “a second expander” are indefinite because a “second rotating shaft” and “a second expander” were defined in claim 1. It is unclear if these are the same or different shaft and expander. 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) 1, 3, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0219631 (Filippone) in view of US 2007/0137203 (Yanai), US 2021/0142921 (Joshi), US 2021/0222619 (Boucher), and US 5867979 (Newton). Regarding claim 1, 3, 6, Filippone teaches a power system (Fig 5), comprising: an engine including an engine housing (enclosing the compressor, heat exchanger, and turbine), a compressor (7) and a first expander (the first stage of turbine 10), wherein an inner space of the engine housing defines a first engine chamber (inner space/first engine chamber is the space inside of which the heat exchanger 2 is located); a nuclear reactor disposed outside of the first engine chamber generating heat energy from nuclear reactions (para 25-28; nuclear reactor 3 is outside of the first engine chamber): a heat exchanger disposed inside the first engine chamber (Fig 5; heat exchanger 2), wherein one side of the heat exchanger is thermally coupled to a working fluid cooling the nuclear reactor (para 49-55; working fluid 30 removes heat from the nuclear reactor at heat exchanger 2d and flows to heat exchanger 2 to add heat to fluid 15), and the other side of the heat exchanger is thermally coupled to an air flow compressed into the first engine chamber by the compressor (the “other side” is the side of the heat exchanger over which compressed fluid 15 from the compressor 7 flows, thereby heating the fluid 15), and wherein the heated air flow drives the first expander to rotate and discharges through a discharge conduit (para 33, 54, Fig 5; discharge conduit is the flowpath conduit aft of the first expander); an inner space of the discharge conduit defining a second engine chamber, wherein the outlet of the first expander is the inlet of the second engine chamber comprised by the discharge chamber (“second engine chamber” is construed as the space aft of the first turbine/expander, through which fluid flows to the second turbine/expander; further shown by Boucher as will be discussed below); a second expander mechanically coupled to a second rotating shaft, disposed within the second engine chamber and configured to expand the heated air flow (the second stage of turbine 10 coupled to a second rotating shaft for driving the generator 12 and receiving heated air), and a generator mechanically coupled with the second expander and configured to generate electricity based on mechanical energy provided by the second expander (generator 12, para 37, 55, Fig 5). Filippone fails to teach the compressor and the first turbine mechanically coupled together through a first rotating shaft, the nuclear reactor generating heat from fission nuclear reactions, wherein the outlet of the first expander is the inlet of the second engine chamber comprised by the discharge chamber; a stationary turbomachinery positioned within the second engine chamber and configured to condition the heated air flow discharged through the discharge conduit, wherein the generator is positioned substantially within the second engine chamber upstream from the second engine chamber outlet However, Yanai teaches a power system comprising turbines and a nuclear reactor generating heat energy from fission nuclear reactions (para 37-38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the nuclear reactor generate heat energy from fission nuclear reactions, as taught by Yanai. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, generating heat energy from fission nuclear reactions yields predictable results (generating heat). Joshi teaches a power system (Fig 3), comprising: an engine including an engine housing (para 28-29, 48-50; casing surrounding the compressor, turbine, and engine 10), and a compressor and a first expander mechanically coupled together through a first rotating shaft (compressor 124, first expander 134, first rotating shaft 144, para 48-50), a heat exchanger disposed inside the first engine chamber (Fig 3 para 30; heat exchanger 150 in the engine chamber), wherein the heat exchanger is configured to heat up an air flow compressed into the engine chamber by the compressor, and wherein the heated air flow drives the first expander to rotate (para 27-30); a second expander mechanically coupled to a second rotating shaft, disposed within the second engine chamber and configured to expand the heated air flow (second expander 132 disposed within a second engine chamber – construed as the engine space inside of which the turbine is located, coupled to second shaft 142), the heat exchanger is disposed at a center portion of the first engine chamber and the rotating shaft extends throughout a center portion of the heat exchanger (Fig 3, para 41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the compressor and the first turbine mechanically coupled together through a first rotating shaft, the second expander mechanically coupled to the second rotating shaft, disposed within the second engine chamber and configured to expand the heated air flow, and the heat exchanger is disposed at a center portion of the first engine chamber and the rotating shaft extends throughout a center portion of the heat exchanger, as taught by Joshi. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, the compressor and the first turbine mechanically coupled together through a first rotating shaft, the second expander mechanically coupled to the second rotating shaft, disposed within the second engine chamber and configured to expand the heated air flow, and the heat exchanger is disposed at a center portion of the first engine chamber and the rotating shaft extends throughout a center portion of the heat exchanger yields predictable results (driving the compressors). Boucher teaches a discharge conduit from a first expander, and a stationary turbomachinery positioned within the second engine chamber and configured to condition the heated air flow discharged through the discharge conduit (Fig 1, para 36-37; discharge conduit and the second engine chamber is the flowpath conduit aft of the high pressure turbine 54; the second engine chamber includes the low pressure turbine 46 and vanes 59; stationary turbomachinery comprising vanes 59, which condition/direct the heated airflow to the low pressure turbine). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a discharge conduit from a first expander, and a stationary turbomachinery positioned within the second engine chamber and configured to condition the heated air flow discharged through the discharge conduit in order to direct flow to the low pressure turbine/second expander, as taught by Boucher. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, providing a discharge conduit from a first expander, and a stationary turbomachinery positioned within the second engine chamber and configured to condition the heated air flow discharged through the discharge conduit yields predictable results (directing the fluid flow). Newton teaches a generator mechanically coupled with the second expander and configured to generate electricity based on mechanical energy provided by the second expander, wherein the generator is positioned substantially within the second engine chamber upstream from the second engine chamber outlet, and wherein the second expander is mechanically coupled with the generator through the second shaft within the second engine chamber (col 4 ll. 8-15, Fig 1; generator 36 mechanically coupled to the low pressure turbine/second expander and positioned within the second engine chamber upstream from the second engine chamber outlet; e.g. upstream of the outlet of the core 12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the generator configured to generate electricity based on mechanical energy provided by the second expander, wherein the generator is positioned substantially within the second engine chamber upstream from the second engine chamber outlet, wherein the second expander is mechanically coupled with the generator through the second shaft within the second engine chamber, as taught by Newton. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, the generator configured to generate electricity based on mechanical energy provided by the second expander, wherein the generator is positioned substantially within the second engine chamber upstream from the second engine chamber outlet, wherein the second expander is mechanically coupled with the generator through the second shaft within the second engine chamber yields predictable results (generating electricity). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5063. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am - 4 pm, Monday-Friday. 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, Devon Kramer can be reached on 571-272-7118. 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. /ANDREW H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 07, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 23, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595774
THREE SERVOVALVE THRUST REVERSER ACTUATOR SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576982
EXHAUST NOZZLE ASSEMBLY FOR AIRCRAFT PROPULSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571539
TURBINE ENGINE HAVING A COMBUSTION SECTION WITH A FUEL NOZZLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560459
LOCK POSITION SENSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12546274
Movable-cascade thrust reverser comprising a multi-functional fixed structure
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+43.0%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 882 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month