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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02-Jan-2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 10-12, 14-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asen (DE 10 2012 006101) (hereinafter “Asen ‘101”) in view of Baumgartner et al. (US 5,582,273).
Regarding claim 10, Asen discloses a brake-application device of a disk brake for a utility vehicle (see machine translation, ¶ 0001), comprising: a pivotable brake lever (7) which is supported, for one part, on an inner wall of a brake caliper (see ¶ 0038), and, for another part, indirectly on a bridge (17) (see ¶ 0038) which is arranged displaceably in the brake caliper and which bears at least one brake plunger (19a, 19b, 20a, 20b) (see ¶¶ 0059, 0069), for which purpose a roller bearing assembly (16a, 16b) which bears against the bridge so as to be secured against rotation and displacement is provided between the brake lever and the bridge (see FIG. 2), wherein the bridge and at least one roller (16a, 16b) of the roller bearing assembly are connected by at least one securing element (29).
Asen does not disclose that the roller comprises a convex cylindrical surface.
Baumgartner teaches a brake-application device of a disk brake for a utility vehicle (see Abstract, FIGS. 6, 7), comprising a bridge (7), wherein the bearing surface on the bridge can be formed concavely (see FIG. 6) or convexly (see FIG. 7), and wherein the corresponding surface of a lever (4, 4a) can be formed convexly (see FIG. 6) or concavely (see FIG. 7), respectively.
It would have been obvious to form the roller of Asen to have a convex shape and the lever to have a corresponding concave shape, as taught by Baumgartner, as a simple substitution of one known element for another that would only provide predictable results (see e.g. Baumgartner, FIGS. 6, 7; showing the convex/concave shapes can be reversed).
Regarding claim 11, Asen discloses that the securing element is held in the bridge and in the at least one roller in a positively locking and/or frictionally locking manner (see FIG. 4; see also ¶ 0043).
Regarding claim 12, Asen discloses that the securing element comprises a clamping sleeve or a dowel pin (29), said clamping sleeve or said dowel pin being pressed into a bore in the bridge and in the at least one roller (see FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Asen discloses two coaxially oriented rollers (16a, 16b) are provided which are arranged with a spacing to one another (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Asen discloses that each of the two rollers are pressed into an eyelet (28) of the bridge (see FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 16, Asen discloses that the eyelets are formed integrally on the bridge (see FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 19, Asen discloses that the at least one roller and the bridge are preassembled as a structural unit (see FIG. 4).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asen (DE 10 2012 006101) (hereinafter “Asen ‘101”) and Baumgartner et al. (US 5,582,273), as applied to claim 10, above, and further in view of Asen (DE 10 2012 014886) (hereinafter “Asen ‘886”) (machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 13, Asen ‘101 does not disclose that the securing element comprises a sheet-metal part which is pressed into a respective groove of the bridge and of the at least one roller.
Asen ‘886 teaches a brake-application device of a disk brake for a utility vehicle (see machine translation, ¶ 0001) comprising a first part (7) connected to a second part (8) via a sheet metal pin (12) (see ¶ 0013; FIG. 7a) pressed into respective grooves on the first part and the second part (see ¶ 0013; FIG. 7a).
It would have been obvious to form the pin of Asen ‘101 as a sheet metal part to allow the pin to be deformed thereby creating a frictional connection between the bridge and the roller.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17 and 18 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection noted above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J LANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5988. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, 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.
/NICHOLAS J LANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
May 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights