Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/085,142

SENSOR INTERFACE FOR CONROL OF AN AIRCRAFT FLIGHT CONTROL SURFACE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Examiner
CURRY, CINDI M
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Eaton Intelligent Power Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
173 granted / 206 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
223
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
42.0%
+2.0% vs TC avg
§102
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§112
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 206 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 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20200079497 A1 Huynh; Neal V. Regarding claim 1, Huynh teaches, a flight control system comprising: a flight control member including a flight control surface (element 114), the flight control member being pivotally moveable about a flight control pivot axis to adjust a flight control angle of the flight control surface (figs 2B and 2C); an actuator for pivoting the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis to adjust the flight control angle of the flight control surface (elements 302 and 312); a rotation sensor integrated with the actuator for sensing rotation corresponding to the actuator (518, para 0083); and a controller that interfaces with the rotation sensor (para 0083, REU), the controller being configured to determine the flight control angle of the flight control member based on a rotational reading of the rotation sensor (para 0083). Regarding claim 2, Huynh teaches, the flight control system of claim 1, wherein the actuator includes a screw-drive (element 514), the screw- drive including a nut assembly threadingly mounted on a threaded shaft (510). Regarding claim 3, Huynh teaches, the flight control system of claim 2, wherein the rotation sensor senses rotation that occurs at the nut assembly as the actuator drives movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis (para0083). Regarding claim 4, Huynh teaches, the flight control system of claim 1, wherein the actuator is a rotary actuator including a drive shaft coupled to a linkage that drives rotation of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis as the drive shaft is rotated (fig. 5, elements 406 and 516). Regarding claim 5, Huynh teaches, the flight control system of claim 4, wherein the rotation sensor measures a rotational position corresponding to the drive shaft (para 0028). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 6, 8, 10-12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huynh as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 8291782 B1 Shaheen; Milad A. et al. Regarding claim 6, Huynh teaches, the flight control system of claim 1, wherein the actuator includes a threaded shaft extending along a shaft axis and a drive for rotating the threaded shaft about the shaft axis (element 514), the actuator also including a nut assembly including a nut threadingly mounted on the threaded shaft such that rotation of the threaded shaft about the shaft axis drives axial movement of the nut assembly along the shaft axis to drive pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis (element 510), but fails to teach, the nut assembly also including a flight control member actuator mount for coupling the flight control member to the nut assembly, the nut assembly further including a pivot arrangement for allowing the flight control member actuator mount to pivot about a first pivot axis relative to the shaft axis as the actuator drives pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis. However, Shaheen teaches, the nut assembly also including a flight control member actuator mount for coupling the flight control member to the nut assembly, the nut assembly further including a pivot arrangement for allowing the flight control member actuator mount to pivot about a first pivot axis relative to the shaft axis as the actuator drives pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis (fig. 1, col. 4, lines 1-7). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuator taught by Huynh with the flight control member actuator mount with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine is to attach the actuate the actuator to the flight control. Regarding claim 8, Huynh as modified teaches, the flight control system of claim 6, wherein the first pivot axis is perpendicular with respect to the shaft axis, and wherein the pivot arrangement is also configured to allow the flight control member actuator mount to pivot about a second pivot axis with respect the shaft axis as the actuator drives pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis, the second pivot axis being perpendicular with respect to the shaft axis and the first pivot axis (fig. 5). Regarding claim 10, Huynh as modified teaches, the flight control system of claim 1, wherein the controller correlates the rotation sensor output to an angle of the flight control surface, and wherein the controller controls the movement of the flight control surface using closed-loop feedback (para 0030). Regarding claim 11, Huynh teaches, a flight control system comprising: a flight control member including a flight control surface (element 114), the flight control member being pivotally moveable about a flight control pivot axis to adjust a flight control angle of the flight control surface (figs 2B and 2C); an actuator for pivoting the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis to adjust the flight control angle of the flight control surface (elements 302 and 312), the actuator including a threaded shaft extending along a shaft axis and a drive for rotating the threaded shaft about the shaft axis (element 514), the actuator also including a nut assembly including a nut threadingly mounted on the threaded shaft such that rotation of the threaded shaft about the shaft axis drives axial movement of the nut assembly along the shaft axis to drive pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis (element 510), but fails to teach, the nut assembly also including a flight control member actuator mount for coupling the flight control member to the nut assembly, the nut assembly further including a pivot arrangement for allowing the flight control member actuator mount to pivot about a first pivot axis relative to the shaft axis as the actuator drives pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis; However, Shaheen teaches, the nut assembly also including a flight control member actuator mount for coupling the flight control member to the nut assembly, the nut assembly further including a pivot arrangement for allowing the flight control member actuator mount to pivot about a first pivot axis relative to the shaft axis as the actuator drives pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis (fig. 1, col. 4, lines 1-7); It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuator taught by Huynh with the flight control member actuator mount with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine is to attach the actuate the actuator to the flight control. Regarding claim 12, Huynh as modified teaches, the flight control system of claim 11, wherein the first pivot axis is perpendicular with respect to the shaft axis, and wherein the pivot arrangement is also configured to allow the flight control member actuator mount to pivot about a second pivot axis with respect the shaft axis as the actuator drives pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis, the second pivot axis being perpendicular with respect to the shaft axis and the first pivot axis (fig. 5). Regarding claim 14, Huynh as modified teaches, the flight control system of claim 11, wherein the flight control surface is a flap of an aircraft (element 114). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7, 9, 13 and 15-20 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Prior art Huynh teaches a rotational sensor integrated withing the actuator for a flight control surface, Shaheen teaches the actuator to flight control surface connection, but they fail to teach, “wherein the rotation sensor is configured to sense a rotational position of the flight control member actuator mount about the first pivot axis” or “wherein a base end of the actuator includes a pivot mount for allowing the threaded shaft to pivot at the base end as the nut assembly of the actuator drives pivotal movement of the flight control member about the flight control pivot axis” or “second pivot pins aligned along the second pivot axis”. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CINDI M. CURRY whose telephone number is (469)295-9296. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:30 M-F. 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 J. Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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. /C.M.C/ Examiner Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 20, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601354
Patio Chair Fan Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582236
VARIABLE TEMPERATURE LAWN CHAIR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576971
PASSENGER SUITE WITH SECONDARY SEAT AND AMENITIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565315
AIRCRAFT BEVERAGE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12565129
Heating Device for Vehicle Seats, and Method for Operating Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+9.7%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 206 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