Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/285,402

NOISE REDUCING NOSECONE FOR AIRCRAFT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 03, 2023
Examiner
SAN MARTIN, EDGARDO
Art Unit
2837
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Scientific Applications And Research Associates Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
884 granted / 1169 resolved
+7.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1192
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
33.1%
-6.9% vs TC avg
§112
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1169 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Claims 27, 34 and 35 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims depend upon canceled claims. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim s 1 – 5, 8, 10 , 13, 14, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27 , 28, 30 – 32, 34 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Horwath (US 3,715,714) . With respect to claim s 1 and 24 , Horwath teaches a nosecone of an aircraft sensor probe, comprising a first portion (Fig.1, Item 12) defining a tip of the nosecone and formed from a first material; a second portion (Fig.1, Item 11) aft of the first portion formed from a second material and defining an internal volume, the second material having a greater porosity than the first material (Col.2, Lines 52 – 53); and a third portion (Fig.1, Item 14) aft of the second portion and configured to arrange a microphone assembly (Fig.1, Item 13) relative to the internal volume ; and wherein the nosecone is configured to redirect the audio signals at the tip and reduce turbulent noise of the audio signal associated with non-parallel local flow angles of the airflow (Col.1, Lines 39 – 49). With respect to claim 2, Horwath teaches wherein the second material (Fig.1, Item 11) comprises a porous material configured to attenuate an audio signal received by the second portion and maintain an acoustic pathway into the internal volume (Col.2, Lines 1 – 17 and 52 – 53, and Col.3, Lines 6 – 28) . With respect to claim s 3 and 27 , Horwath teaches wherein the porous material is configured to maintain the acoustic pathway into the internal volume for signals having a frequency of less than about 1200 Hz (Col.6, Lines 4 – 14) . With respect to claim 4, Horwath teaches wherein the internal volume is configured to direct the audio signal toward the microphone assembly (Fig.1, Item 13) . With respect to claims 5 , 8 and 10 , Horwath teaches wherein the porous material comprises a plurality of particles at least partially fused to one another and defining a plurality of pores therebetween (Col.2, Lines 52 – 53); wherein the second portion (Fig.1, Item 11) comprises a tubular wall of a porous material revolved about an axis of the nosecone (Fig.1, Item 12) to define the internal volume ; and wherein the second material comprises a porous material including a sintered polymer material (Col.2, Lines 52 – 53) . With respect to claims 1 3 and 14, Horwath teaches wherein one or both of the first portion (Fig.1, Item 12) defines a mounting structure (Fig.1, Item 16) configured to engage the second portion (Fig.1, Item 11); and wherein the mounting structure includes a nosecone mount with a locking groove that rotationally receives the nosecone (Col.2, Lines 47 – 50) . With respect to claims 17 and 18 , Horwath teaches wherein the nosecone mount includes a first aperture formed therein and in fluid or acoustic communication with the internal volume ; and wherein the mounting structure forms a conduit in fluid or acoustic communication with the internal volume and the first aperture (Fig.1) . With respect to claim s 2 0 , 30 and 32 , Horwath teaches wherein the microphone assembly (Fig.1, Item 13) is arranged relative to the internal volume by a printed circuit board and the printed circuit board has a second aperture formed therein and in fluid or acoustic communication with the conduit, such that the microphone assembly is in fluid or acoustic communication with the internal volume via the first aperture, the second aperture, and the conduit (Col.3, Line 56 – Col.4, Line 2) . With respect to claim s 21 and 31 , Horwath teaches wherein the third portion (Fig.1, Item 14) is configured to structurally support and enhance a rigidity of the first portion and the second portion and is configured to define an interface and engage with a nosecone mount of the aircraft sensor probe (Col.2, Lines 35 – 50) . With respect to claim 23, Horwath teaches wherein the first portion (Fig.1, Item 12) , the second portion (Fig.1, Item 11) , and the third portion (Fig.1, Item 14) cooperate to define a continuous exterior contour of the nosecone (Fig.1) . With respect to claim 28, Horwath teaches wherein the porous material is arranged to define one or more discrete sections of the nosecone downstream of the tip (Fig.1, Item 12) and wherein the porous material defines an internal volume and the microphone assembly (Fig.1, Item 13) is mounted facing the internal volume (Fig.1) . With respect to claim 34, Horwath teaches wherein the portion of the microphone assembly (Fig.1, Item 13) is arranged facing a direction transverse to an axial direction of the internal volume (Fig.1) . With respect to claim 36, Horwath teaches wherein the nosecone defines an acoustic pathway to the portion of the microphone assembly (Fig.1, Item 13) through a cylindrical segment of the nosecone (Fig.1, Item 11) , wherein the cylindrical segment is a radially symmetric tube formed from a porous sintered material (Col.2, Lines 52 – 53) . 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 11, 15, 16, 25 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horwath (US 3,715,714). With respect to claims 11 and 25 , Horwath teaches the limitations already discussed in a previous rejection, but fails to disclose wherein the sintered polymer material comprises one or more of a polyethylene material or a sintered polypropylene material ; or wherein a tip of the nosecone is formed from an air-impervious plastic material comprising a nylon material or a polycarbonate material . The Examiner considers that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to employ any desired material as the sintered material and for the tip of the nosecone because it would provide a predetermined rigidity and structural integrity needed for the particular application. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin , 125 USPQ 416. With respect to claims 15 and 16, The Examiner considers that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to secure the nosecone to the nosecone mount via a binary mount structure ; or wherein the mounting structure comprises one or more prongs extending into a thickness of the second portion because it would facilitate the assembly of the nosecone parts to each other following established technologies known in aeronautics . With respect to claim 35, The Examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art to further provide a sealing element configured to block moisture intrusion towards the microphone assembly because it is a well-known method of waterproofing separable parts . Conclusion The attached hereto PTO Form 892 lists prior art made of record that the Examiner considered it pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT EDGARDO SAN MARTIN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-2074 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 9:00 - 5:00 M - F . Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration t ool. To schedule an interview, a pplicant 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, Shawki S. Ismail can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272- 3985. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Edgardo San Martin/ Edgardo San Martín Primary Examiner Art Unit 2837 DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" April 3, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 03, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12571218
SOUND DAMPENED FLOORING WITH IMPROVED ACOUSTIC PERFORMANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573362
ACOUSTIC ENCLOSURE FOR SOUND AMPLIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562623
APPARATUS FOR COOLING AN ELECTRIC PROPULSION ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556055
ELECTRICAL INTERCONNECTOR AND MOTOR INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546326
BRUSHLESS ELECTRIC MOTOR FOR ROTATING A FAN OF A MOTOR-DRIVEN VENTILATION UNIT OF A VEHICLE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+6.3%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1169 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month