Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/894,348

Roof Module for Forming a Vehicle Roof Comprising a Cleaning Nozzle

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 24, 2022
Examiner
HENSON, KATINA N
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Webasto SE
OA Round
4 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
344 granted / 631 resolved
-15.5% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
77 currently pending
Career history
708
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
55.5%
+15.5% vs TC avg
§102
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 631 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 . 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 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. Status of Claims Below is the Final Action on the Merit for claim 17. Claims 1, 4 – 6, 8 – 9 and 13 – 16 are allowed. Claims 2 – 3, 7 and 10 – 12 are cancelled. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huelsen (DE 10 2019122193 A1) citing U.S. equivalent (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0169314 A1) in view of Williams et al. (U. S. Patent No. 9,919,748 B2). Regarding Independent Claim 17, Huelsen teaches a roof module (roof module, 12) for forming a vehicle roof on a motor vehicle (Paragraph [0055]), the roof module (12) comprising: a panel component (panel component, 67; Paragraph [0092]) which at least partially forms a roof skin (roof skin, 26 or 52) of the vehicle roof (Fig. 1), the roof skin (26/52) serving as an outer sealing surface of the roof module (Paragraph [0068]); at least one environment sensor (environmental sensors, 34/36 A and B) configured to send and/or receive electromagnetic signals through a see-through area for detecting a vehicle environment (Paragraphs [0061] and [0061]); and wherein the at least one cleaning nozzle (nozzles 44 A and B with 50A and B) configured to clean the see-through area (Paragraph [0064]); and is disposed laterally on the left and/or right along the optical axis of the at least one environment sensor (Fig. 1) the at least one cleaning nozzle cleans the see-through area by a fluid cone (Paragraph [0064]), and configured that a fluid cone is captured by the headwind and aerodynamically guided, via the at least one flow guide element positioned on the panel component, toward the see-through area (Paragraph [0064] ; the location of the nozzle allows for the fluid cone to be configured to be caught by the headwind and accelerated in the direction of the see-through area). Huelsen does not teach at least one flow guide element is disposed on the panel component, the at least one flow guide element being configured to focus headwind onto at least part of the see- through area, wherein the at least one flow guide element is configured such that flow guide element is adjustable relative to a bearing point by a retaining spring. Williams, however, teaches at least one flow guide element (spoiler, 100; Fig. 3) is disposed on the panel component (sensing system, 80), the at least one flow guide element (95) being configured to focus headwind onto at least part of the see- through area (see through area of sensor, 100; Fig. 3), wherein the at least one flow guide element (95) is configured such that flow guide element is adjustable relative to a bearing point by a retaining spring Col. 4, lines 40 – 67). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the module of Huelsen to further include at least one flow guide element is disposed on the panel component, the at least one flow guide element being configured to focus headwind onto at least part of the see- through area, wherein the at least one flow guide element is configured such that flow guide element can be adjustable relative to a bearing point by a retaining spring, as taught by Williams, to provide a cleaning system that takes advantage of airflow resulting from the vehicle traveling, reducing the need to use liquid and/or compressed gas for cleaning the sensor window. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants Arguments/Remarks dated March 9, 2026 with respect to the rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn; however, after further consideration a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Williams et al. Conclusion 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm. 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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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. /KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 24, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 24, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 04, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 04, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 09, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 09, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593949
CLEANING DEVICE AND USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593950
WAND WITH INTEGRAL HOSE CLEANOUT FEATURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588749
POOL CLEANING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582224
Determining a Pressure Associated with an Oral Care Device, and Methods Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575512
Debris Blower
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+31.9%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 631 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