Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 16/737,796

SMART LATCH ASSEMBLY WITH ACTUATOR MODULE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 08, 2020
Examiner
MERLINO, ALYSON MARIE
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Magna Closures Inc.
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
655 granted / 1014 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+31.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1053
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§102
28.3%
-11.7% vs TC avg
§112
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1014 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 28, 2026 has been entered. The examiner acknowledges applicant’s amendments to claims 1-11, 20, and 26-29 and the cancellation of claims 12-19 and 21. Claims 22-25 are withdrawn as set forth in Paragraph 3 of the Non-Final Office Action dated April 21, 2025. Claims 22-25 should include the “Withdrawn” status indicator in the claim listing per 37 CFR 1.121. Claim Objections Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 17, the word “wherien” should be changed to “wherein.” 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) 1-4, 7, 8, 20, and 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boualam et al. (FR 2794164 A1) in view of Nakamura (JP 2001311338 A), and further in view of Mao et al. (US Pub. No. 2003/0137202). In regards to claim 1, Boualam et al. discloses a closure latch assembly, comprising: a latch module (Figure 1) including a latch housing B enclosing a latch mechanism 4, 5, 9, 11 operable in a first state (Figure 2) and a second state (state in which the fork bolt 5 is released, Lines 253-260 of the Computer Generated Translation); a power actuator having an electric motor 16 configured to rotate a motor shaft 38 and a pinion gear 17 driven by the electric motor, the power actuator being configured for shifting the latch mechanism from its first state into its second state (Lines 253-260 of the Computer Generated Translation); an actuator module including a cover 56, 58, 47 (as a unit, Figure 7) that houses the electric motor, wherein the electric motor is positioned within the cover without any gearing housed within the cover (gearing 17, 18, 36, and 19 are located exterior to the cover, Figure 7), the motor shaft extends from the electric motor out of the cover through a port 57 to the pinion gear that is external to the cover to the pinion gear that is external to the cover (Figure 7); and an attachment arrangement (ends of portions 20 and 21 that engage into the latch module, Figure 3) for securing the actuator module to the latch module. Boualam et al. fails to disclose that the motor shaft extends from the electric motor out of the cover through the port in sealed relation with the port. Nakamura teaches a port or opening 15 in a plate 11 through which a shaft 7 extends out of the plate in sealed relation with the port or opening (the shaft is in sealed relation with the port because seal body 39 seals the port or opening 15 through which the shaft extends, Paragraph 26 of the Computer Generated Translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to seal the portion in relation to the motor shaft, with reasonable expectation of success, so as to protect the power actuator from liquids. Boualam et al. fails to disclose a printed circuit board (PCB) extending in a plane parallel to a plate segment of the cover, such that the motor shafts extends from the electric motor in a direction perpendicular to the plane within which the printed circuit board extends. Mao et al. teaches a cover 28 that houses a printed circuit board (PCB) 42 that extends in a plane parallel to a plate segment of the cover (see Figure 4 below), such that a motor shaft 20 extends from an electric motor 12 in a direction perpendicular to the plane within which the printed circuit board extends (Figures 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include a printed circuit board, with reasonable expectation of success, such that the electric motor can be electrically controlled. PNG media_image1.png 530 646 media_image1.png Greyscale In regards to claim 2, Mao et al. teaches an actuator module (Figure 1) including an ECU/actuator assembly (Figure 1), including the printed circuit board. In regards to claim 3, Mao et al. teaches that the ECU/actuator assembly includes a housing plate (plate portion located directly above the printed circuit board, Figure 2), and wherein the cover is mounted to the housing plate (Figure 2). Although Mao et al. does not specifically teach that the cover is at least partially over-molded on the housing plate, the examiner would like to point out that these limitations are process limitations relating to the method or process by which the device is being fabricated. Therefore, even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. Thus since Boualam et al. in view of Mao et al. teaches the same final product as applicant, the claimed limitations are met. In regards to claim 4, Mao et al. teaches that the ECU/actuator assembly includes the printed circuit board (PCB) having an electrical connector (Figure 4), and wherein the ECU/actuator assembly and the power actuator or motor are part of a common assembly (Figure 1). In regards to claim 7, Boualam et al. discloses that the actuator module includes a housing plate 47 (Figure 7) having a first side facing the latch mechanism (see Figure 7 below) and the pinion gear and an opposite second side facing the electric motor (see Figure 7 below), the sealed portion extending from the first side to the opposite second side (Figure 7); and wherein the motor shaft extends from the motor through the sealed port to the pinion gear (Figure 7), such that the housing plate extends between the motor and the pinion gear (Figure 7). PNG media_image2.png 568 730 media_image2.png Greyscale In regards to claim 8, Boualam et al. discloses that the pinion gear is coupled to a drive gear 18 that is a power release gear, such that rotation of the drive gear by the pinion gear from a first position to a second position shifts a latch release mechanism 11 for shifting the mechanism from its first state into its second state (Lines 253-260 of the Computer Generated Translation). In regards to claim 20, Boualam et al. discloses a closure latch assembly, comprising: a latch module B including a mechanism 4, 5 operable in a first state (Figure 2) and a second state (state in which the fork bolt 5 is released, Lines 253-260 of the Computer Generated Translation); and an actuator module 20, 21 comprising: a housing plate 47 comprising a first side (see Figure 7 on Page 6 of the current Office Action) facing the latch module (faces at least a wall of the latch module when the actuator module is assembled to the latch module, Figure 3) and an opposite second side (see Figure 7 on Page 6 of the current Office Action), and a single port 57 extending through the housing plate from the first side through to the opposite second side (Figure 7); and a power actuator comprising a motor 16 and no gearing provided on the opposite second side of the housing plate (no gearing is located in the area directly to the right of the second side of the housing plate because the motor takes up this area, Figure 7) and enclosed by a motor housing 56, 61 (as a unit in Figure 7) on the opposite second side and comprising a motor shaft 38 extending from the motor, through the single port in relation to a pinion gear 17 on the first side, with the pinion gear located outside the motor housing (Figure 7), the power actuator for rotating the motor shaft and the pinion gear for shifting the mechanism its first state into its second state (Lines 253-260 of the Computer Generated Translation). Boualam et al. fails to disclose that the second side of the housing plate is sealed from the first side of the housing plate, such that moisture, water, debris, dirt, or grease on the first side is inhibited from penetrating the motor housing. Nakamura teaches a port or opening 15 in a plate 11 having a first side (side facing component 6, Figure 2a) and an opposite second side (side facing component 17, Figure 2a), with the second side being sealed from the first side by a seal 39 (the seal creating a liquid tight seal of the port 15, Paragraph 26 of the Computer Generated Translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to seal the second side from the first side, with reasonable expectation of success, so as to protect the power actuator from liquids. Boualam et al. fails to disclose a control unit provided on the opposite second side for controlling actuation of the power actuator, with the control unit including a printed circuit board (PCB) extending in a plane, such that the motor shafts extends in a direction perpendicular to the plane. Mao et al. teaches a cover 28 that houses a printed circuit board (PCB) 42, forming at least part of a control unit, that extends in a plane parallel to a plate segment of the cover (see Figure 4 on Page 5 of the current Office Action), such that a motor shaft 20 extends from an electric motor 12 in a direction perpendicular to the plane within which the printed circuit board extends (Figures 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include a printed circuit board and control unit, with reasonable expectation of success, such that the electric motor can be electrically controlled. In regards to claim 26, Boualam et al. discloses that the motor shaft extends into the latch module (extends into the latch module because the motor shaft and its associated components are located in the confines of the latch module, Figures 3 and 4). In regards to claim 27, Boualam et al. discloses that the pinion gear is disposed in the latch module (Figures 3 and 4). In regards to claim 28, Nakamura teaches that the sealed relation of the motor shaft with the port is formed by an O-ring seal (seal 39 is annular or ring-shaped, and is therefore an O-ring seal, Paragraph 38 of the Computer Generated Translation). In regards to claim 29, Nakamura teaches that the sealed relation of the motor shaft with the single port is formed by an O-ring seal (seal 39 is annular or ring-shaped, and is therefore an O-ring seal, Paragraph 38 of the Computer Generated Translation). Claim(s) 5, 6, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boualam et al. (FR 2794164 A1) in view of Nakamura (JP 2001311338 A), further in view of Mao et al. (US Pub. No. 2003/0137202) as applied to claims 1-4, 7, 8, 20, and 26-29 above, and further in view of Ito et al. (US-9689183). In regards to claim 5, Boualam et al. discloses that the power actuator includes a carrier plate 58 secured to the housing plate, the electric motor being secured to the carrier plate and driving a drive gear 18, the pinion gear being rotatably mounted to the carrier plate (rotatably mounted via the housing plate, Figure 7) and meshed with the drive gear. Boualam et al. fails to disclose a gear stop bumper secured to the carrier plate. Ito et al. teaches a gear stop bumper 46 secured to a component 12 to cooperate with a gear 43. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a gear stop bumper in Boualam et al., with reasonable expectation of success, to limit a rotation of one of the gears. In regards to claim 6, Boualam et al. discloses that the drive gear includes an actuation feature 23 (included in the mechanical connection of the drive gear and the latch mechanism) configured for operable communication with the latch mechanism within the latch module, such that rotation of the drive gear from a first position to a second position via energization of the electric motor results in shifting of the latch mechanism from its first state into its second state (Lines 253-260 of the Computer Generated Translation). In regards to claim 10, Boualam et al. discloses that the power actuator includes a carrier plate 58 secured to the housing plate, the electric motor being secured to the carrier plate (Figure 7) and comprising the motor shaft extending through the sealed port, formed in the housing plate of the actuator module, wherein the power actuator includes a drive gear 18 being rotatably mounted to the carrier plate (rotatably mounted via the connection of components 20 and 21, Figure 7) and meshed with the pinion gear. Boualam et al. fails to disclose a gear stop bumper secured to the carrier plate either directly or indirectly. Ito et al. teaches a gear stop bumper 46 secured to a component 12 to cooperate with a gear 43. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include a gear stop bumper in Boualam et al., with reasonable expectation of success, to limit a rotation of one of the gears. Although Boualam et al. does not specifically teach that the carrier plate is overmolded to the housing plate, the examiner would like to point out that these limitations are process limitations relating to the method or process by which the device is being fabricated. Therefore, even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. Thus since Boualam et al. discloses the same final product as applicant, the claimed limitations are met. Claim(s) 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boualam et al. (FR 2794164 A1) in view of Nakamura (JP 2001311338 A), further in view of Mao et al. (US Pub. No. 2003/0137202), and further in view of Ito et al. (US-9689183) as applied to claims 5, 6, and 10 above, and further in view of Kiekert AG (DE 20312168 U1) (referred to as Kiekert). In regards to claims 9 and 11, Boualam et al. in view of Ito et al. teaches the device as applied to claims 5 and 6 above, with the latch mechanism having a ratchet 4 and pawl 5, wherein the pawl is operable in a ratchet holding position (Figure 2) to hold the ratchet in a striker capture position (Figure 2) and is operable in a ratchet releasing position to permit the ratchet to move to a striker release position (Lines 253-260 of the Computer Generated Translation), and wherein an axis of rotation of the pinion gear, driven by the electric motor, is substantially perpendicular to an axis of the pawl (Figure 3). Boualam et al. fails to disclose that an axis of rotation of the pinion gear is substantially parallel to the axis of the pawl. Kiekert teaches a closure latch assembly comprising a latch mechanism with a ratchet 4 and pawl 5, and an electric motor 9 driving a pinion gear (gear connected to the motor and meshed with the drive gear 8, Figure 4) and a drive gear 8. Kiekert teaches that a rotary axis of the pinion gear driven by the electric motor is substantially parallel to an axis of the pawl (Figures 3 and 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to adjust the gearing arrangement of Boualam et al. such that the rotary axis of the pinion gear is substantially parallel to the axis of the pawl, as taught by Kiekert, with reasonable expectation of success, since various arrangements of gearing between a motor and a drive gear are known in the art to produce the necessary rotation output. Response to Arguments In light of applicant’s amendments to the claims, new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 with Mao et al. (US Pub. No. 2003/0137202) are set forth in the current Office Action. The examiner appreciates applicant’s amendments to claim 10, and therefore, the objection to claim 10 set forth in the previous Office Action is withdrawn. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSON MERLINO whose telephone number is (571)272-2219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7 AM to 3 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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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. /ALYSON M MERLINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675 February 9, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 08, 2020
Application Filed
Dec 15, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 21, 2023
Response Filed
Jun 22, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 28, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 30, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 30, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 31, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
May 23, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 28, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 17, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 21, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 28, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595691
DECLUTCHING SYSTEM FOR A HANDLE ARRANGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584334
MOTOR VEHICLE DOOR ARRANGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12565795
ELECTROMECHANICAL LOCKSET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12559976
DOOR LOCK DETECTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12546151
DEADBOLT DOOR LOCKING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+31.4%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1014 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