Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 19/042,136

CYCLONIC SEPARATOR FOR GAS TURBINE ENGINE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 31, 2025
Priority
Feb 21, 2024 — IN 202411012304
Examiner
CLARK, RYAN C
Art Unit
3745
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
General Electric Company
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
258 granted / 293 resolved
+18.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
326
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
§103
39.9%
-0.1% vs TC avg
§102
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
§112
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 293 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 05/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Rahaim et al. (Col. 5:29-46, Col. 7:1-7, Col. 8:39-42) appear to be directed to method of injecting the cooling fluid into the cyclonic separator not needing swirlers, swirler vanes, or deflectors to achieve the desired flow path which causes the particulate matter to move around the center body and allow for the particulate to exit from 112, and the clean air to move through the deswirler 166 to the clean air outlet 164 and does not expressly teach away from using additional features to achieve additional particulate separation and Rahaim et al. in Col. 5:56-6:22 discusses using continuously reducing and increasing cross-sections to achieve acceleration and deceleration of the airflow and therefore does not teach away from using additional undulations in the central body as taught by Atsuchi et al. Regarding the argument that the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. do not teach or suggest, “the central body defines an internal channel in fluid communication with the first fluid outlet. The combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. as asserted by the Examiner includes modifying the central body of the Rahaim et al. with the teaching of Atsuchi et al. and thus creates a central body as claimed by the applicant. 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. Claims 1, 3-7, 12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahaim et al. (US Patent 10,450,951 B2) in view of Atsuchi et al. (US PGPUB 2019/0078515 A1). PNG media_image1.png 618 642 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Rahaim et al. discloses a gas turbine engine (10): a compressor section (22); a turbine section (32) downstream of the compressor section; and a cyclonic separator (102) disposed between the compressor section and the turbine section (Fig. 2, Col.4:59-5:7; "FIG. 2 is a schematic view of a section of the engine 10 adjacent the junction between the combustor section 28 and the turbine section 32 of FIG. 1, showing a cyclonic separator 102 coupled to an inducer section 104"), the cyclonic separator defining an axial direction (Fig. 2) and a radial direction (Fig. 2), the cyclonic separator comprising: a housing comprising a first end (see annotated Fig. 2 above), a second end (see annotated Fig. 2 above), and an outer wall (106) extending between the first end and the second end; a central body (148) disposed in the housing and defining an annular chamber (108) with the outer wall; an inlet (110) disposed at the first end of the housing and in fluid communication with the annular chamber and the compressor section; a first fluid outlet (114) disposed at the second end of the housing and in fluid communication with the turbine section; a second fluid outlet (112) disposed in the outer wall downstream of the first end of the housing, the second fluid outlet extending outward at least partially in the radial direction relative to the outer wall (Fig. 2); However, Rahaim et al. does not disclose, "a fluid deflector disposed on the central body between the first end of the housing and the second end of the housing, the fluid deflector extending outward in the radial direction and rearward in the axial direction into the annular chamber toward the outer wall." PNG media_image2.png 338 442 media_image2.png Greyscale Atsuchi et al. teaches, in the field of particle separators, a particle separator with a fluid deflector (1202, "separator body" with several crests 1208 and valleys 1210, Fig. 13) around a central core flow (1126, Fig. 12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the central portion of the cyclonic separator of Rahaim et al. with the separator body (with several crests 1208 and valleys 1210) and central core flow of Atsuchi et al., as both references are in the same field of endeavor, and one of ordinary skill would appreciate that, "These undulations can control a primary fluid velocity of the fluid and re-attachment points of the fluid. For example, the crests 1208 can accelerate the fluid and where different flow paths of the fluid re-combine after separating at the upstream edges 1218. Both this acceleration and re-combination of flow paths can increase the efficiency at which particles are separated from the fluid. For example, without the undulations, fewer particles may be separated from the fluid ([0074])." and "The unfiltered or non-diverted portion 1226 of the fluid 1222 can be directed into the combustor or combustor section 106 of the turbomachine 100 for combustion, or can be directed to another location for another purpose [0076]." Regarding claim 3, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 1 as above, wherein the fluid deflector includes an upstream surface (Atsuchi et al., indicated by the deflectors themselves 1202), the upstream surface extending outward in the radial direction and rearward in the axial direction (Atsuchi et al., Fig. 13). Regarding claim 4, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 1 as above, wherein the central body defines an internal channel (Atsuchi et al., Fig. 13 shows an internal channel which would be in fluid communication with the first fluid outlet of Rahaim et al.) in fluid communication with the first fluid outlet. Regarding claim 5, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 1 as above, wherein the turbine section comprises a turbine (Rahaim et al., 34) having a cooling passage (Rahaim et al., 98), and wherein the first fluid outlet disposed at the second end of the housing is fluidly connected to the cooling passage of the turbine (Rahaim et al., Fig. 2). Regarding claim 6, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 1 as above, further comprising a cooling circuit (Rahaim et al., 98) fluidly connecting the compressor section to the turbine section (Rahaim et al.; Fig. 2, see the source from 20, 24, 26 to the turbine 34), wherein the cooling circuit comprises the cyclonic separator (Rahaim et al., Fig. 2). Regarding claim 7, Rahaim et al. discloses a cyclonic separator (102) for a turbine (34) cooling flow (98), the cyclonic separator defining a centerline (Fig. 4, Fig. 6, 48), an axial direction (see annotated Fig. 2 above), and a radial direction (see annotated Fig. 2 above), the cyclonic separator comprising: a housing comprising a first end (see annotated Fig. 2 above), a second end (see annotated Fig. 2 above), and an outer wall (106) extending between the first end and the second end; a central body (148) disposed in the housing and defining an annular chamber (108) with the outer wall; an inlet (110) disposed at the first end of the housing and in fluid communication with the annular chamber and the compressor section; a first fluid outlet (114) disposed at the second end of the housing and in fluid communication with the turbine section; a second fluid outlet (112) disposed in the outer wall downstream of the first end of the housing, the second fluid outlet extending outward at least partially in the radial direction relative to the outer wall (Fig. 2); However, Rahaim et al. does not disclose, "a fluid deflector disposed on the central body between the first end of the housing and the second end of the housing, the fluid deflector extending outward in the radial direction and rearward in the axial direction into the annular chamber toward the outer wall." Atsuchi et al. teaches, in the field of particle separators, a particle separator with a fluid deflector (1202, "separator body" with several crests 1208 and valleys 1210, Fig. 13) around a central core flow (1126, Fig. 12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the central portion of the cyclonic separator of Rahaim et al. with the separator body (with several crests 1208 and valleys 1210) and central core flow of Atsuchi et al., as both references are in the same field of endeavor, and one of ordinary skill would appreciate that, "These undulations can control a primary fluid velocity of the fluid and re-attachment points of the fluid. For example, the crests 1208 can accelerate the fluid and where different flow paths of the fluid re-combine after separating at the upstream edges 1218. Both this acceleration and re-combination of flow paths can increase the efficiency at which particles are separated from the fluid. For example, without the undulations, fewer particles may be separated from the fluid ([0074])." and "The unfiltered or non-diverted portion 1226 of the fluid 1222 can be directed into the combustor or combustor section 106 of the turbomachine 100 for combustion, or can be directed to another location for another purpose [0076]." Regarding claim 12, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 7 as above, wherein the fluid deflector includes an upstream surface (Atsuchi et al., indicated by the deflectors themselves 1202), the upstream surface extending outward in the radial direction and rearward in the axial direction (Atsuchi et al., Fig. 13). Regarding claim 15, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 7 as above, wherein the central body defines an internal channel (Atsuchi et al., Fig. 13 shows an internal channel which would be in fluid communication with the first fluid outlet of Rahaim et al.) in fluid communication with the first fluid outlet. Regarding claim 16, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 15 as above, wherein the central body defines a vent (Atsuchi et al., 1214) in fluid communication with the internal channel. Regarding claim 17, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 7 as above, wherein the inlet has a bend (Rahaim et al., 150) arranged to swirl air (Rahaim et al., Fig. 6) around the central body. Regarding claim 18, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 7 as above, wherein the fluid deflector extends for the second fluid outlet (the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. would provide for the fluid deflector, from Atsuchi et al., extending down the axis of the central body toward the second fluid outlet of Rahaim et al.). Regarding claim 19, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 7 as above, wherein the second fluid outlet defines an outlet passage (Rahaim et al.; Fig. 3, 112) in fluid communication with an exit flow (Rahaim et al., 98). Regarding claim 20, the combination of Rahaim et al. and Atsuchi et al. teach all of claim 7 as above, wherein the fluid deflector is arranged to direct air moving in the axial direction outward in the radial direction toward the second fluid outlet (Atsuchi et al., 1224 "clean air" which corresponds with the second fluid outlet of Rahaim et al.). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 21 is allowed. Claim 21 includes subject matter indicated allowable in the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/19/2026 (see Pages 9-10). Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RYAN C CLARK whose telephone number is (571)272-2871. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0730-1730, Alternate Fridays 0730-1630. 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, Courtney D Heinle can be reached at (571)-270-3508. 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. /RYAN C CLARK/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
May 19, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 14, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12687145
RECIRCULATING HYDRO-PNEUMATIC IMPULSE TURBINE
1y 10m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12663018
Hybrid Manufacture of an Impeller
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12637976
FLUID COOLER INSTALLATION AND METHOD FOR TURBOFAN ENGINE
2y 2m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12623309
COLLABORATIVE ROBOT WELDING SYSTEM
3y 1m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12619805
METHOD FOR PLANNING A LAYOUT OF A RENEWABLE ENERGY SITE
4y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+8.5%)
1y 11m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 293 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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