Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/839,715

BRAKE LINING ARRANGEMENT FOR A VEHICLE DISC BRAKE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jun 14, 2022
Examiner
TORRES WILLIAMS, MELANIE
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
ZF Active Safety GmbH
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
628 granted / 742 resolved
+32.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
786
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
37.5%
-2.5% vs TC avg
§102
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§112
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 742 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 1-3, 7, and 18 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. In claim 1, line 12, Applicant recites “a brake lining carrier plate”. It is unclear if this limitation refers to the previously recited “at least one brake lining carrier plate” in line 3. 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. Claims 1, 2, 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Farkas et al. (WO 2020/038911 A1). Re claim 1, Farkas et al. disclose a brake lining arrangement for a vehicle disc brake, comprising: at least one brake lining carrier plate (4, 4’) at least one friction lining (5, 5’) which is attached to the front surface of the at least one brake lining carrier plate at least one restoring element (30) which is fastened to a rear surface of the at least one brake lining carrier plate and which may be coupled to a brake calliper of the vehicle disc brake, wherein the at least one restoring element has at least two spring portions (37, 37’), wherein the at least one restoring element is configured such that the at least two spring portions of the at least one restoring element act on the brake calliper under pretensioning and wherein the at least one restoring element has at least one fastening portion (33, 33’) and has at least one stop portion (38, 38’) which has a predetermined spacing from the front surface of the brake lining carrier plate and wherein the brake lining arrangement has a brake lining carrier plate which has at least one recess (4b, 4b’) in which at least one stop portion extends.(Fig. 6) Re claim 2, Farkas et al. disclose wherein the at least one restoring element js configured to be fastened thereby to the rear surface of the at least one brake lining carrier plate, wherein the at least one fastening portion (33, 33’) extends between the at least two spring portions. Re claim 7, Farkas et al. disclose wherein the at least two spring portions (37, 37’) are configured to be hook-shaped. Re claim 19, Farkas et al. disclose a brake lining arrangement for a vehicle disc brake, comprising: at least one brake lining carrier plate (4, 4’),at least one friction lining which is attached to the front surface of the at least one brake lining carrier plate at least one restoring element (30) which is fastened to a rear surface of the at least one brake lining carrier plate and which may be coupled to a brake calliper (1) of the vehicle disc brake, wherein the at least one restoring element has at least two spring portions (37, 37’), wherein the at least one restoring element is configured such that the at least two spring portions of the at least one restoring element act on the brake calliper under pretensioning; wherein the at least one restoring element has at least one fastening portion (33, 33’), the at least one restoring element being able to be fastened thereby to the rear surface of the at least one brake lining carrier plate, wherein the at least one fastening portion extends between the at least two spring portions; and wherein the at least one restoring element has at least one support portion (36, 36’) for support on the brake calliper. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9-11 and 21 are allowed. Claims 13-16, and 20 are 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. Claim 3 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 7 and 18 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-7127. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday - Friday 7:00AM-3:00PM. 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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. /MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3616 MTW January 6, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 14, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 09, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Nov 14, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 09, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Feb 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 14, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583421
DRUM BRAKE WITH ROTATABLE BRAKE SHOE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583547
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETECTING THE SPEED OF A BICYCLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577993
REDUCED PROFILE PISTON ADJUSTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570257
BRAKING SYSTEM FOR A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570370
CONTROL SYSTEM FOR HUMAN-POWERED VEHICLE
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
85%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.3%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 742 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