Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/183,268

AIRCRAFT PROPULSION SYSTEM AND THRUST REVERSER MECHANISM

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Apr 18, 2025
Examiner
SUNG, GERALD LUTHER
Art Unit
3741
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mra Systems LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
670 granted / 842 resolved
+9.6% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
866
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
39.8%
-0.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 842 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 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, 7-9, 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by De Vulpillieres et al. US 2016/0340052. PNG media_image1.png 364 820 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, DV discloses an aircraft propulsion system, see title, comprising: an engine assembly 7 including a fan that rotates to move air to create thrust; a cowl that surrounds at least a portion of the engine assembly, 2, 4, 5, 6, the cowl including an outer surface arranged away from the engine assembly that provides an aerodynamic surface, see fig. 8, the nacelle has an outer aerodynamic structure shown as the radially outer surface for instance as element 13 of fig. 10, and a thrust reverser 10 connected to the cowl and configured to provide reverse thrust while in a reverse position, see fig. 4; wherein the thrust reverser includes a blocker door 10 and a blocker door hinge 16, the blocker door is connected to the blocker door hinge, see para. [0040], and the blocker door is configured to pivot around a hinge line between a forward position and a reverse position, see figs. 2-3, the blocker door hinge includes a spherical joint, labeled above, configured to connect the blocker door to the cowl via the hinge bolt, and the hinge line intersects with an axis of rotation of the spherical joint, the hinge line goes through the spherical joint shown in fig. 10. Regarding claim 5, DV discloses the hinge bolt is not positioned along an axis that is parallel to the hinge line as show in annotated fig. 10 above. Regarding claim 7, DV discloses the outer surface of the cowl forms a continuous circumference and the hinge bolt is arranged entirely within the outer surface. Referring to fig. 10, the outer surface of the cowl forms a continuous circumference at least at the trailing edge or the leading edge portion 2, and the hinge is entirely within the outer surface 13 as shown in fig. 10. Regarding claim 8, DV discloses the hinge is displaced from an engine centerline. See fig. 10, the hinge is in the outer nacelle and thus radially spaced from the engine centerline axis. Regarding claim 9, DV discloses the blocker door forms a curved panel and has a circumference that decreases from a forward end to an aft end along the engine centerline. See 4, the curved panel 18 can be seen in the deployed position with the forward end being larger than the aft end, the forward end is radially outward of the aft end in the deployed position. Regarding claim 11, DV discloses the blocker door further comprises a controllable actuator that causes the blocker door to be rotated away from a central axis of the engine assembly to be positioned in the reverse position. See para. [0041], the doors are moved by an actuator. Regarding claim 12, DV discloses a nozzle, wherein an entirety of a forward edge of the blocker door is in contact with the nozzle when the blocker door is in the forward position. See fig. 8, the fixed nozzle portion 11 is entirely in contact with the blocker doors 10 when in the closed position as shown in fig. 6. Regarding claim 13, DV discloses an aircraft propulsion system, comprising: a cowl that surrounds at least a portion of an engine assembly, the cowl including an outer surface configured to provide an aerodynamic surface and extending around the engine assembly, the cowl comprising: a nozzle comprising a fixed structure, and a thrust reverser positioned adjacent to the nozzle, the thrust reverser configured to move between a forward position and a reverse position, wherein the thrust reverser is connected to the cowl and includes a blocker door including a blocker door hinge, and the blocker door is configured to rotate about a hinge line between the forward position in which a forward edge of the blocker door is adjacent the nozzle and the reverse position in which the forward edge is moved away from the nozzle to provide a reverse thrust while in the reverse position, and the blocker door hinge includes a spherical joint connecting the blocker door to the cowl via a hinge bolt, the hinge bolt is positioned at an angle to the hinge line and the hinge line intersects an axis of rotation of the spherical joint. Referring to claim 1, 5 above, DV discloses all elements. Regarding claim 14, DV discloses the angle of the hinge bolt to the hinge line is greater than zero degrees. Referring to annotated fig. 10 above, the hinge line and the hinge bolt are arranged at an angle greater than zero. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. At the outset, the Examiner is directing the Applicant to comply with 37 C.F.R. 1.121. The Applicant may not strike claim limitations from the claim without providing the appropriate strike out. Failure to comply with the rules will result in non-compliant amendments. The Applicant has struck from their claims, the limitation “the blocker door hinge includes a hinge bolt that is misaligned with the hinge line”. Given the change in scope, new prior art previously not applied is attached. Additionally, the Examiner notes with regard to claim 13, the claim scope includes conventional thrust reversers since claim 14 clarifies the scope of claim 13 includes hinges bolts with zero angle difference to the hinge line. See for example Dubois US 4,960,243. The Applicant should consider a limitation defining the outer surface forming a continuous surface at an axial location where the hinge is located which appears to be the subject matter for which improvement is made on the cited prior art. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 GERALD LUTHER SUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3765. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 PST. 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. /GERALD L SUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 18, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Nov 21, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 17, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 23, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595064
SWIVEL LOCKING MECHANISM FOR AIRCRAFT SEAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584445
GAS TURBINE ENGINE AND FUEL CELL ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584413
Gas Turbine Engine with Composite Airfoil and Method of Forming
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577913
GEARED GAS TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571350
MULTI-MODAL GAS-TURBINE ENGINE STARTING
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+28.9%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 842 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