Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/404,324

AUGMENTED REALITY ASSISTED BORESCOPE INSPECTION OF TURBOMACHINERY ENGINES AND RELATED COMPONENTS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jan 04, 2024
Examiner
TUCKER, WESLEY J
Art Unit
2661
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp.
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
596 granted / 715 resolved
+21.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
734
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
§103
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
§102
39.4%
-0.6% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 715 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “controller configured to receive…” in claim 1 and subsequent dependent claims 3-6, 11 and 13-14. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by USPN 2014/0207406 to Domke et al. With regard to claim 1, Domke discloses an augmented reality inspection system for inspecting features within components, comprising: a camera system configured to capture images of a component (paragraphs [0025], [0049], borescope camera); a controller configured to receive the images from the camera system, utilize the received images to determine a location of the camera system and the captured images relative to the component, and utilize the determined location to generate graphic images associated with a feature of the component at the determined location (paragraph [0049], a borescope tip map can be displayed and overlaid on the display image to give an approximation of the location of the borescope tip as a means to guide the operator); and a display configured to generate a real-time display of the component and the feature based in the captured images, wherein the controller is further configured to superimpose the graphic images associated with the feature of the component onto the real-time display of the component (paragraphs [0025]-[0026] and [0049], Display is connected to the borescope camera and capable of overlaying certain data onto the image for more informative view). With regard to claim 2, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 1, wherein the images are of the feature of the component at the determined location (paragraphs [0032]-[0034], [0038]-[0039] and [0042], component parts of imaged for inspection). With regard to claim 3, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to identify a target image of the component and to use the identified target image to determine the location of the captured images and to generate the graphic images associated with the determined location (paragraphs [0009], [0049] and [0071], The location of the borescope tip can be displayed as an overlay in addition to measurement and annotation overlays. The current location can be identified in relation to an object being inspected). With regard to claim 4, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 3, wherein the target image comprises at least one of a bar code, QR code, or a defined pattern on the component and the controller is further programmed to associate the target image with the location of the captured image (paragraph [0071], The location can be determined by imaging component parts as well as bar code identifiers or recognition logic upon a captured image portion). With regard to claim 5, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 3, wherein the controller is configured to continuously update the determination of the location of the camera system and captured images based on identification of one or more target images (paragraphs [0071]-[0077], The identification of the location of the borescope is performed in an ongoing and updating manner as the borescope changes position and orientation). With regard to claim 6, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 3, wherein the controller is configured to generate a virtual button associated with features of the component and to superimpose the virtual button on the real-time display and the system further includes a means of actuating the virtual button (paragraph [0049], A variety of overlays including menus are disclosed. A menu with clickable options is interpreted as a virtual button that may be clicked or allow user interaction). With regard to claim 7, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 3, wherein the graphic image comprises at least one of a label, tag, arrow, or overlay that corresponds to a feature of the component (paragraph [0056], Overlay data examples include arrow pointers, crosses, geometric shapes, etc.). With regard to claim 8, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 3, wherein the graphic image comprises inspection directions prompting the inspection of features of the component (paragraphs [0060] and [0067], The user is guided through the inspection with instructions and supplemental data). With regard to claim 9, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 8, wherein the inspection directions include a visual prompt directing movement of the camera system from the location determined based on captured images to another location or orientation for another feature of the component (paragraphs [0030], [0049], [0060],The user of the borescope camera is provided guidance on how and where to move the camera to perform inspection in a series of guided steps). With regard to claim 10, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 3, wherein the graphic image comprises a visual representation of a geometry of a feature of the component superimposed on the real-time display over a corresponding feature of the component (paragraph [0049], real time overlays are provided for the inspection images including measurement overlays which is considered a visual representation of geometry of a feature). With regard to claim 11, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 3, wherein the controller is further configured to generate one of a still image, an audio message, a video for viewing on the display in response to identification of the target image (Audio, paragraph [0056]; Video and images, paragraphs [0039], [0041], [0044] and [0049]-[0051]). With regard to claim 12, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 1, wherein the camera system comprises a borescope configured to capture images of internal features of the component (paragraph [0032], the borescope is inserted into a plurality of borescope ports and other location of the turbo machinery to capture images of internal features). With regard to claim 13, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 1, wherein the display comprises at least one of a portable display or a headset configured to generate images in real-time from the camera system and to superimpose the graphic images generated by the controller (paragraphs [0025] and [0049], A tablet portable display is disclosed for displaying the inspection images in real time with overlay information). With regard to claim 14, Domke discloses the inspection system as recited in claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to generate documentation of inspection findings based on the captured images (Fig. 5, report 158,159 and paragraphs [0045]-[0047], The inspection images are used to analyze and document a report of the inspection). With regard to claim 15, Domke discloses a method of inspecting a turbine engine comprising: capturing images of features of a component of the turbine engine with a movable camera system (paragraphs [0025], [0032], [0049], A borescope camera system is used to images of internal components of a turbine); determining a location of the movable camera system and a captured image of a feature of the component based on features of the component within the captured image (paragraph [0049], a borescope tip map can be displayed and overlaid on the display image to give an approximation of the location of the borescope tip as a means to guide the operator); generating a graphic image associated with a feature of the component at the determined location (paragraph [0049], Multiple overlays are generated for the inspection image); and generating a real-time display of the component on a display device utilizing the captured images and the generated graphic image superimposed over the captured images of the component (paragraphs [0025]-[0026] and [0049], A display is connected to the borescope camera and capable of overlaying certain data onto the image for more informative view). With regard to claim 16, Domke discloses the method as recited in claim 15, further comprising determining a location of the movable camera system within the component part based on identification of a target image within the captured images of the component and using the identified target image to determine the location of the captured images and to trigger generation of graphic images corresponding to the determined location (paragraph [0049], a borescope tip map can be displayed and overlaid on the display image to give an approximation of the location of the borescope tip as a means to guide the operator. The overlays are generated in response to specific recognized image content such as object identification overlays). With regard to claim 17, Domke discloses the method as recited in claim 16, wherein the target image comprises at least one of a bar code, QR code, or a defined pattern affixed to the component (paragraph [0071], The location can be determined by imaging component parts as well as bar code identifiers or recognition logic upon a captured image portion). With regard to claim 18, Domke discloses the method as recited in claim 17, further comprising generating a virtual button associated with features of the component, superimposing the virtual button on the real-time display, and triggering a predefined action in response to triggering of the virtual button (paragraph [0049], A variety of overlays including menus are disclosed. A menu with clickable options is interpreted as a virtual button that may be clicked or allow user interaction). With regard to claim 19, Domke discloses the method as recited in claim 16, further comprising identifying a feature of the component based on captured images and generating inspection directions corresponding to the identified feature of the component (paragraphs [0060], [0067] and [0075], The user is guided through the inspection with instructions and supplemental data based on recognition of a location within the object of inspection). With regard to claim 20, Domke discloses the method as recited in claim 19, further comprising automatically generating documentation of inspection findings based on the captured images upon completion of the generated inspection directions (Fig. 5, report 158,159 and paragraphs [0045]-[0047], The inspection images are used to analyze and document a report of the inspection). Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WESLEY J TUCKER whose telephone number is (571)272-7427. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM 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, JOHN VILLECCO can be reached at 571-272-7319. 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. /WESLEY J TUCKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2661
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 04, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 03, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597221
IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597222
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING A REGION OF WATER CLEARANCE OF A WATER SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592057
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING AND CLASSIFYING RETINAL MICROANEURYSMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585939
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISTRIBUTED DATA ANALYTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586410
Method and Device for Dynamic Recognition of Emotion Based on Facial Muscle Movement Monitoring
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
83%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+6.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 715 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