Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/038,860

AIRCRAFT COMPRISING AT LEAST ONE ENGINE ATTACHMENT SYSTEM WHICH HAS COPLANAR ANCHORING POINTS ON THE ENGINE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 28, 2025
Examiner
XAVIER, VALENTINA
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Airbus Operations SAS
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
559 granted / 747 resolved
+22.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
771
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.7%
+9.7% vs TC avg
§102
30.2%
-9.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 747 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 1 – 19 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. Claim 1 recites “a first anchoring point” (line 13) and “a second anchoring point” (line 14). However, later in the claim, the limitations refer to “at least two first anchoring points” (line 16) and “the second anchoring points” (line 17). The term “at least two first anchoring points” lacks proper antecedent basis because the claim previously introduced only a single first anchoring point. Similarly, the phrase “the second anchoring points” lacks proper antecedent basis, as the claim previously recites only a second anchoring point. Claim 1 recites the limitation “connected to the latter”. It is unclear what this refers to. Claim 1 recites the limitation “a same second transverse plane”. It is unclear whether the same refers to it being the same as the first transverse plane. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1 – 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112, 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The most relevant prior art of record (Gormley et al. US 11,760,498) teaches a multi-point attachment and multiple anchoring system for transferring loads between structure elements but does not teach the claimed aircraft engine mounting geometry including the multi-plane engine configuration or the articulated engine-to-pylon connections, namely, the first and second right and left extensions positioned on either side of the central body, at least one right reinforcement connecting the first and second right extensions and at least one left reinforcement connecting the first and second left extensions, the first right and left extensions being offset towards a front in a longitudinal direction parallel to the axis of the engine relative to the second right and left extensions and positioned substantially in a first transverse plane, and the engine attachment system comprising at least three connections each comprising a first anchoring point rigidly secured to the primary structure, a second anchoring point rigidly secured to the engine and an articulation connecting the first and second anchoring points. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gormley et al. (US 11,760,498) – Engine mount waiting fail safe detection Hodgkinson (US 4,997,145) – Engine mount including engine mount failure indication Pome et la. (EP 4,112,476) – Assembly with propeller and electric motor Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VALENTINA XAVIER whose telephone number is (571)272-9853. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am - 6:30 pm. 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, Joshua Huson can be reached at (571) 270-5301. 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. /VALENTINA XAVIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 28, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600496
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR A SPACECRAFT DOCKING STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600463
AIRCRAFT RUDDER PEDAL WITH MECHANICAL KINEMATIC CHAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595039
AIR DIRECTING ARRANGEMENT FOR CONTROLLING AIRFLOW AT AN OUTLET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583629
Solar Sail for Orbital Maneuvers
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570406
AIRCRAFT STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
75%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+9.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 747 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