Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/721,492

AIRCRAFT TURBOMACHINE COMPRISING A DEVICE FOR INHIBITING THE ACCUMULATION OF COKE IN A DUCT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 18, 2024
Examiner
KANG, EDWIN G
Art Unit
3741
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
SAFRAN
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
4-5
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
212 granted / 328 resolved
-5.4% vs TC avg
Strong +69% interview lift
Without
With
+68.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
369
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
50.7%
+10.7% vs TC avg
§102
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
§112
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 328 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Claim 6, line 1-2; claim 10, line 7; claim 14, line 1-2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “said or each turbulence element” should be - - each of the at least one turbulence element- -. Appropriate correction is required. 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, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shershnyov et al (US 20140137566 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) in view of Lao et al (US 20190293289 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2025) Regarding claim 1, Shershnyov discloses an aircraft turbomachine (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002 and the shaft or coupling connecting the compressor to the turbine. See “gas turbine” from American Heritage Dictionary and Cambridge Aerospace Dictionary. The term “aircraft” is intended use, a gas turbine engine can be used in an aircraft), comprising a gas generator (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002) that includes, along a longitudinal axis (X) (The central axis of the gas turbine engine), at least one compressor (Paragraph 0002), a combustion chamber (Figure 1; 18, Paragraph 0002), and at least one turbine (Paragraph 0002), the turbomachine further comprising at least one duct (Figure 2; 66) configured to supply liquid (Paragraph 0025, 0026) to at least one member chosen from an oil nozzle and a fuel injector (The outlet of Figure 2; 66) the duct having rectilinear portions (The upstream most vertical portion of Figure 2; 66 and the horizontal portion of 66) and bent portions (The bent portions between the vertical and horizontal portions) and comprising at least one area in which the liquid is liable to coke (Functional Language, The entirety of Figure 2; 66 is liable to coke because it is near a heat source), the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element (The protrusions surrounding and defining each dimple of Figure 2; 72) projecting at a level (The height of the protrusions) of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the duct comprises several successive areas (The vertical portions and horizontal portion of Figure 2; 66)in which the liquid is liable to coke (The entire duct is viable to coking), the at least one turbulence element being located at each of the successive areas in the duct. Shershnyov does not disclose wherein the at least one turbulence element are of different types. However, Lao teaches at least one turbulence element are of different types (Figure 4; 44a, 44c). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Shershnyov wherein at least one turbulence element are of different types as taught by and suggested by Lao in order to achieve the desired pressure drop (Paragraph 0022, The modification uses different turbulators in the duct). Regarding claim 5, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov further discloses wherein each of the at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide (The turbulator is an obstacle or guide). Shershnyov does not disclose wherein the at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip. However, Lao teaches at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide (Figure 4; 44a, is an obstacle or guide in the form of a stud and 44c each is an obstacle or guide in the form of a fin) in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Shershnyov wherein the at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip as taught by and suggested by Lao in order to achieve the desired pressure drop (Paragraph 0022, This is the same modification as claim 1). Regarding claim 6, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov further discloses wherein each of the at least one turbulence passes through all or part of the duct (The turbulence elements passes through all of the duct). Regarding claim 8, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov further discloses wherein the duct supplies fuel (The fuel from Figure 2; 58) to the fuel injector in the combustion chamber. Regarding claim 10, Shershnyov discloses an aircraft turbomachine (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002 and the shaft or coupling connecting the compressor to the turbine. See “gas turbine” from American Heritage Dictionary and Cambridge Aerospace Dictionary. The term “aircraft” is intended use, a gas turbine engine can be used in an aircraft), comprising a gas generator (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002) that includes, along a longitudinal axis (X) (The central axis of the gas turbine engine), at least one compressor (Paragraph 0002), a combustion chamber (Figure 1; 18, Paragraph 0002), and at least one turbine (Paragraph 0002), the turbomachine further comprising at least one duct (Figure 2; 66) configured to supply liquid (Paragraph 0025, 0026) to at least one member chosen from an oil nozzle and a fuel injector (The outlet of Figure 2; 66), the duct having rectilinear portions (The upstream most vertical portion of Figure 2; 66 and the horizontal portion of 66) and bent portions (The bent portions between the vertical and horizontal portions) and comprising at least one area in which the liquid is liable to coke (Functional Language, The entirety of Figure 2; 66 is liable to coke because it is near a heat source), the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element (The turbulence elements Figure 2; 72 are at each successive area) projecting at a level (The level of projecting of Figure 2; 72) of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide (Figure 2; 72 is an obstacle or guide). Shershnyov does not disclose wherein the at least one turbulence element is in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip. However, Lao teaches at least one turbulence element (Figure 4; 44a, 44c) is an obstacle or a guide (Figure 4; 44a, is an obstacle or guide in the form of a stud and 44c each is an obstacle or guide in the form of a fin) in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Shershnyov wherein the at least one turbulence element is in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip as taught by and suggested by Lao in order to achieve the desired pressure drop (Paragraph 0022, The modification uses different turbulators in the duct). Regarding claim 11, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov further discloses wherein the duct comprises several successive areas (The vertical portions and horizontal portion of Figure 2; 66) in which the liquid is liable to coke (The entire duct is viable to coking), the at least one turbulence element being located at each of the successive areas in the duct. Regarding claim 13, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov does not disclose wherein the at least one turbulence element are of different types. However, Lao teaches wherein the at least one turbulence element are of different types (Figure 4; 44a, 44c). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Shershnyov wherein the at least one turbulence element are of different types as taught by and suggested by Lao in order to achieve the desired pressure drop (Paragraph 0022, This is the same modification as claim 10). Regarding claim 14, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov discloses wherein each of the at least one turbulence element passes through all or part of the duct (The turbulence elements passes through all of the duct). Regarding claim 16, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov discloses wherein the duct supplies fuel (The fuel from Figure 2; 58) to the fuel injector in the combustion chamber. Regarding claim 18, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Shershnyov further discloses wherein said or each of the turbulence element projects from an internal surface (The dimpled texture is on the internal surface of Figure 2; 66) of the duct. Claim(s) 1, 7, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang et al (US 20090133581 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) in view of Shershnyov and Lao. Regarding claim 1, Fang discloses an aircraft turbomachine (Paragraph 0003), comprising a gas generator (Figure 1; 10) that includes, along a longitudinal axis (X) (Figure 1; 511), at least one compressor (Figure 1; 18), a combustion chamber (Figure 1; 20), and at least one turbine (Figure 1; 22), the turbomachine further comprising at least one duct (The duct feeding Figure 2; 613 which includes 568) configured to supply liquid (Figure 2; 611) to at least one member chosen from an oil nozzle (Figure 2; 613) and a fuel injector the duct having rectilinear portions (The horizontal, vertical and slanted portion of the duct) and bent portions (The bent portions between the rectilinear portions) and comprising at least one area in which the liquid is liable to coke (Functional Language, The entirety of duct is liable to coke because it is near a heat source). Fang does not disclose the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element projecting at a level of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the duct comprises several successive areas in which the liquid is liable to coke, the at least one turbulence element being located at each of the successive areas in the duct, and wherein the at least one turbulence element are of different types. However, Shershnyov teaches a turbomachine (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002 and the shaft or coupling connecting the compressor to the turbine. See “gas turbine” from American Heritage Dictionary and Cambridge Aerospace Dictionary), comprising a gas generator (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002) that includes, along a longitudinal axis (X) (The central axis of the gas turbine engine), at least one compressor (Paragraph 0002), a combustion chamber (Figure 1; 18, Paragraph 0002), and at least one turbine (Paragraph 0002), the turbomachine further comprising at least one duct (Figure 2; 66) configured to supply liquid (Paragraph 0025, 0026) to at least one member chosen from an oil nozzle and a fuel injector (The outlet of Figure 2; 66) the duct having rectilinear portions (The upstream most vertical portion of Figure 2; 66 and the horizontal portion of 66) and bent portions (The bent portions between the vertical and horizontal portions) and comprising at least one area in which the liquid is liable to coke (Functional Language, The entirety of Figure 2; 66 is liable to coke because it is near a heat source), the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element (The protrusions surrounding and defining each dimple of Figure 2; 72) projecting at a level (The height of the protrusions) of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the duct comprises several successive areas (The vertical portions and horizontal portion of Figure 2; 66)in which the liquid is liable to coke (The entire duct is viable to coking), the at least one turbulence element being located at each of the successive areas in the duct. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Fang wherein the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element projecting at a level of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the duct comprises several successive areas in which the liquid is liable to coke, the at least one turbulence element being located at each of the successive areas in the duct as taught by and suggested by Shershnyov in order to resist the build-up or caking of the fluid (Paragraph 0026, the modification adds turbulators to at least the inside of the duct). Fang in view of Shershnyov does not teach wherein the at least one turbulence element are of different types. However, Lao teaches at least one turbulence element are of different types (Figure 4; 44a, 44c). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Fang in view of Shershnyov wherein the at least one turbulence element are of different types as taught by and suggested by Lao in order to achieve the desired pressure drop (Paragraph 0022, The modification uses different turbulators in the duct). Regarding claim 7, Fang in view of Shershnyov and Lao teaches the invention as claimed. Fang further discloses wherein the duct supplies oil (Figure 2; 611) to the nozzle which is configured to lubricate at least one bearing (Figure 2; 542) of the turbomachine (The duct supplies oil to lubricate one bearing). Claim(s) 9, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shershnyov in view of Lao as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tomescu (US 20210285381 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025). Regarding claim 9, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the turbomachine according to claim 1 as claimed. Shershnyov further discloses a method of decoking the at least one duct, for use in the turbomachine, the method comprising: a first operating phase (The operating phase of Fig. 2) of the gas generator wherein the liquid is conveyed by the duct to the at least one member selected from the oil nozzle and the fuel injector, in order to supply the at least one member with the liquid, wherein the liquid is conveyed through the duct to said at least one member, said at least one turbulence element generating turbulences (Turbulators generate turbulence) in the liquid which are configured to lift and evacuate the coke from said at least one area (The prior art has turbulators which are analogous to the turbulence elements of the instant application. Both the turbulators and turbulence elements are passive flow control devices which create turbulence by being in the flow. Like the instance application, the turbulence created by the turbulators can lift and evacuate the coke). Shershnyov in view of Lao does not teach a second stop phase of the gas generator wherein the coke is liable to form in said at least one area of the duct, and a third restarting phase of the gas generator. However, Tomescu teaches a first operating phase (The phase when the engine is running prior to the shutdown, Paragraph 0002) of a gas generator (Figure 1A; 10) wherein liquid (The fuel or oil in Paragraph 0002) is conveyed by a duct (The duct conveying the fuel or oil of Paragraph 0002), a second stop phase of the gas generator wherein the coke is liable to form in at least one area of the duct (Paragraph 0002), and a third restarting phase (The restart of the engine of Paragraph 0002) of the gas generator wherein the liquid is conveyed through the duct. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Shershnyov in view of Lao to include a second stop phase of the gas generator wherein the coke is liable to form in said at least one area of the duct, and a third restarting phase of the gas generator as taught by and suggested by Tomescu because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Tomescu’s restarting of the gas generator according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Shershnyov in view of Lao’s gas generator, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case restarting the gas generator, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification stops and restarts the turbomachine of Shershnyov). Regarding claim 17, Shershnyov in view of Lao teaches the turbomachine according to claim 10 as claimed. Shershnyov further discloses a method of decoking the at least one duct, for use in the turbomachine, the method comprising: a first operating phase (The operating phase of Fig. 2) of the gas generator wherein the liquid is conveyed by the duct to the at least one member selected from the oil nozzle and the fuel injector, in order to supply the at least one member with the liquid, wherein the liquid is conveyed through the duct to said at least one member, said at least one turbulence element generating turbulences (Turbulators generate turbulence) in the liquid which are configured to lift and evacuate the coke from said at least one area (The prior art has turbulators which are analogous to the turbulence elements of the instant application. Both the turbulators and turbulence elements are passive flow control devices which create turbulence by being in the flow. Like the instance application, the turbulence created by the turbulators can lift and evacuate the coke). Shershnyov in view of Lao does not teach a second stop phase of the gas generator wherein the coke is liable to form in said at least one area of the duct, and a third restarting phase of the gas generator. However, Tomescu teaches a first operating phase (The phase when the engine is running prior to the shutdown, Paragraph 0002) of a gas generator (Figure 1A; 10) wherein liquid (The fuel or oil in Paragraph 0002) is conveyed by a duct (The duct conveying the fuel or oil of Paragraph 0002), a second stop phase of the gas generator wherein the coke is liable to form in at least one area of the duct (Paragraph 0002), and a third restarting phase (The restart of the engine of Paragraph 0002) of the gas generator wherein the liquid is conveyed through the duct. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Shershnyov in view of Lao to include a second stop phase of the gas generator wherein the coke is liable to form in said at least one area of the duct, and a third restarting phase of the gas generator as taught by and suggested by Tomescu because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Tomescu’s restarting of the gas generator according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Shershnyov in view of Lao’s gas generator, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case restarting the gas generator, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification stops and restarts the turbomachine of Shershnyov). Claim(s) 10, 12, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang in view of Shershnyov and Quigg et al (US 3826079 as referenced in OA dated 10/7/2025) Regarding claim 10, Fang discloses an aircraft turbomachine (Paragraph 0003), comprising a gas generator (Figure 1; 10) that includes, along a longitudinal axis (X) (Figure 1; 511), at least one compressor (Figure 1; 18), a combustion chamber (Figure 1; 20), and at least one turbine (Figure 1; 22), the turbomachine further comprising at least one duct (The duct feeding Figure 2; 613 which includes 568) configured to supply liquid (Figure 2; 611) to at least one member chosen from an oil nozzle (Figure 2; 613) and a fuel injector the duct having rectilinear portions (The horizontal, vertical and slanted portion of the duct) and bent portions (The bent portions between the rectilinear portions) and comprising at least one area in which the liquid is liable to coke (Functional Language, The entirety of duct is liable to coke because it is near a heat source). Fang does not disclose the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element projecting at a level of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip. However, Shershnyov teaches an aircraft turbomachine (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002 and the shaft or coupling connecting the compressor to the turbine. See “gas turbine” from American Heritage Dictionary and Cambridge Aerospace Dictionary. The term “aircraft” is intended use, a gas turbine engine can be used in an aircraft), comprising a gas generator (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002) that includes, along a longitudinal axis (X) (The central axis of the gas turbine engine), at least one compressor (Paragraph 0002), a combustion chamber (Figure 1; 18, Paragraph 0002), and at least one turbine (Paragraph 0002), the turbomachine further comprising at least one duct (Figure 2; 66) configured to supply liquid (Paragraph 0025, 0026) to at least one member chosen from an oil nozzle and a fuel injector (The outlet of Figure 2; 66), the duct having rectilinear portions (The upstream most vertical portion of Figure 2; 66 and the horizontal portion of 66) and bent portions (The bent portions between the vertical and horizontal portions) and comprising at least one area in which the liquid is liable to coke (Functional Language, The entirety of Figure 2; 66 is liable to coke because it is near a heat source), the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element (The turbulence elements Figure 2; 72 are at each successive area) projecting at a level (The level of projecting of Figure 2; 72) of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide (Figure 2; 72 is an obstacle or guide). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Fang wherein the turbomachine further including at least one turbulence element projecting at a level of said at least one area in the duct, wherein the at least one turbulence element is an obstacle or a guide as taught by and suggested by Shershnyov in order to resist the build-up or caking of the fluid (Paragraph 0026, the modification adds turbulators to at least the inside of the duct). Fang in view of Shershnyov does not teach wherein the at least one turbulence element is in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip. However, Quigg teaches wherein at least one turbulence element (Figure 5; 23) is in the form of a stud, fin (Figure 5; 23 is a fin), propeller, thread, or twisted strip. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Fang in view of Shershnyov wherein the at least one turbulence element is in the form of a stud, fin, propeller, thread, or twisted strip as taught by and suggested by Quigg because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Quigg’s use of a specific turbulator according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Fang in view of Shershnyov’s aircraft turbomachine, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case producing turbulence, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification uses fin turbulators). Regarding claim 12, Fang in view of Shershnyov and Quigg teaches the invention as claimed. Fang does not disclose wherein the at least one turbulence element are of the same type. However, Shershnyov teaches wherein the at least one turbulence element are of the same type (The turbulence elements are of the same type). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Fang wherein the at least one turbulence element are of the same type as taught by and suggested by Shershnyov in order to resist the build-up or caking of the fluid (Paragraph 0026, this is the same modification as claim 10). Regarding claim 15, Fang in view of Shershnyov and Quigg teaches the invention as claimed. Fang further discloses wherein the duct supplies oil (Figure 2; 611) to the nozzle which is configured to lubricate at least one bearing (Figure 2; 542) of the turbomachine (The duct supplies oil to lubricate one bearing). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 1/7/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that using the teaching of Lao in Shershnyov is improper hindsight. Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Applicant asserts that the turbulators of Lao disturbs airflow and would not disturb the fuel flow. Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Using the turbulators of Lao in Shershnyov has the turbulators of Lao disturbing the fuel flow because 0026 of Shershnyov states 72 reduces caking of fuel which one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize is because 72 disturbs the fuel flow. Applicant asserts that in Shershnyov, 72 is on the external surface of 66. Examiner respectfully disagrees. 72 is both on the external and internal surfaces of 66. The reason for this 2nd Non-Final Action is because the Examiner has changed the motivation of using Shershnyov in Fang. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hughes et al (US 20170175637 as referenced in OA dated 10/7/2025) states in Paragraph 0073 that different types of turbulators can be interchanged Zhang et al (US 20170292385 as referenced in OA dated 10/7/2025) states in Paragraph 0021 that different types of turbulators can be interchanged Maurer et al (US 20150361889 as referenced in OA dated 10/7/2025) states in Paragraph 0057 that different types of turbulators can be interchanged Clum et al (US 20180274369 as referenced in OA dated 10/7/2025) states in Paragraph 0031 that different types of turbulators can be interchanged Mongillo et al (US 20190024894 as referenced in OA dated 10/7/2025) states in Paragraph 0041 that different types of turbulators can be interchanged Hindle et al (US 20130051981 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2025) states in Pargraph 0017 that aircraft and power generation gas turbine engines are interchangeable Hindle et al (US 20130051982 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2025) states in Pargraph 0018 that aircraft and power generation gas turbine engines are interchangeable Hoke (US 20120186262 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2025) states in Pargraph 0019 that combustor teachings can be applied to both aircraft and power generation gas turbine engines McKinney (US 20110185736 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2025) states in Pargraph 0019 that combustor teachings can be applied to both aircraft and power generation gas turbine engines Dai (US 20120186258 as referenced in OA dated 5/21/2025) states in Pargraph 0019 that combustor teachings can be applied to both aircraft and power generation gas turbine engines Alexander et al (US 20090252604 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Paragraph 0043 that lubricant is fuel Alexander et al (US 20070137217 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Paragraph 0001 that lubricant is fuel Binek et al (US 20200109663 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Paragraph 0013 that lubricant is fuel Morris et al (US 20190195129 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Paragraph 0034 that lubricant is fuel Johnson et al (US 20180195395) as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025 states in Paragraph 0002 states the air to sumps is for cooling Gould et al (US 20190063324 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Paragraph 0002 states the air to sumps is for cooling Carella (US 8109159 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Column 1, lines 21-26 that a gas turbine engine can be used for an aircraft or power generation Pfeifer (US 20100262401 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Paragraph 0003 that a gas turbine engine can be used for an aircraft or power generation Tersmette (US 20160123178 as referenced in OA dated 1/17/2025) states in Paragraph 0022 that a gas turbine engine can be used for an aircraft or power generation Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN G KANG whose telephone number is (571)272-9814. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 PM EST. 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 at (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. /EDWIN KANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 16, 2025
Response Filed
May 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 07, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601489
NOZZLE ASSEMBLY, COMBUSTOR AND GAS TURBINE COMPRISING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584421
HEAT EXCHANGER WITH INLET AND OUTLET TURNING VANES FOR USE IN GAS TURBINE ENGINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577923
EXHAUST NOZZLE AND A METHOD OF OPERATING AN EXHAUST NOZZLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12553385
COMPACT TURBOMACHINE COMBUSTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12540581
SYSTEM AND METHOD HAVING FLUID INJECTORS FOR ISOTHERMAL EXPANSION IN TURBINE STAGE OF GAS TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+68.7%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 328 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