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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 10454341 to Grundmann.
Re: claim 1. Grundmann shows in figure 2A a brake device comprising: a hard magnet 202; a soft magnet 204 configured to switch polarity between a first polarity and a second polarity when being subjected to a magnetic field and configured to maintain the polarity when the magnetic field is removed; an electric coil 210 located around the soft magnet; an electric control system or that which controls the application of electric pulses configured to apply a current pulse to the electric coil to generate the magnetic field for changing the polarity of the soft magnet, and a brake element comprising a magnetic target section 214, the brake element being arranged to move to a released position when the soft magnet adopts the first polarity, and arranged to move to a braking position due to a magnetic field generated by the hard magnet and the soft magnet in combination and acting on the magnetic target section when the soft magnet adopts the second polarity as disclosed in col. 5 lines 18-34, wherein in the braking position, the brake element 214 frictionally brakes an output member 206 or 208 with sufficient magnetic attractive force.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 2-4, 6, 7, 15, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundmann in view of DE-10109141 (DE’141).
Re: claims 2 and 3. Grundmann shows in figure 2A the use of the brake element 214, but is silent with regard to it being forced towards the released position.
DE’141 teaches in figures in the paragraph beginning “In the illustration of Fig. 2 with a first embodiment of the device” the use of a brake element 17 being forced towards a released position by a releasing spring 20.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake element of Grundmann to have been forced towards the released position by a releasing spring, in view of the teachings of DE’141, in order to provide a means of avoiding inadvertent or unintentional braking or locking.
Re: claim 4. Grundmann is silent with regard to the device having a brake hinge wherein the brake element is rotatable about the brake hinge between the released position and the brake position.
DE’141 teaches in figures 1-3 the use of a brake device including a brake hinge 19 wherein the brake element 17, 18 is rotatable about the brake hinge between the released position and the brake position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake device of Grundmann to have included a brake hinge, in view of the teachings of DE’141, in order to provide a braking means with a self-energizing effect i.e. requiring less actuator force for the same braking torque.
Re: claims 6, 7, and 15. Grundmann is silent with regard to the brake device being in the environment of an arrangement for controlling movements of an access member relative to a frame.
DE’141 teaches in figures 1-3 the limitation of an arrangement for controlling movements of an access member 1 relative to a frame 3, the arrangement comprising a brake device shown in figure 2 according to claim 1 arranged to brake the access member 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake device of Grundmann to have been utilized in the environment of an arrangement for controlling movements of an access member relative to a frame, in view of the teachings of DE’141, in order to provide a means of preventing the access member from slamming shut due to gravity or vehicle tilt and potentially hurting a vehicle operator or passenger.
Re: claim 16. Grundmann, as modified, is silent with regard to the access member further comprising a closing spring.
DE’141 teaches in figures 1-3, the access member 1 further comprising a closing spring 13 arranged to force the access member towards a closed position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the access member of Grundmann, as modified, to have comprised a closing spring, in view of the teachings of DE’141, in order to provide a means of preventing the access member from staying unintentionally open.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundmann in view of DE-10109141 (DE’141) as applied above, and further in view of WO-2020259935 (WO’935).
Re: claims 8 and 9. Grundmann, as modified, is silent with regard to the arrangement further comprising an electromagnetic generator having a rotor arranged to be driven to generate electric energy by movement of the access member.
WO’935 teaches in the first claim the use of an electromagnetic generator 14 having a rotor 22 arranged to be driven to generate electric energy by movement of an object 12.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the arrangement of Grundmann, as modified, to have included an electromagnetic generator having a rotor arranged to be driven to generate electric energy by movement of the access member, in view of the teachings of WO’935, in order to provide a means of avoiding the use of an external means of electrical energy supply to help power the brake.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 11, 12, 14, 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 filed 4/22/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that element 214 of Grundmann does not “frictionally brake” element 206. Examiner notes; however, that with sufficient magnetic force element 214 will be pulled to frictionally contact or brake element 206 because there is only a gap between elements 206 and 214 i.e. nothing to prevent contact between elements 206 and 214 due to sufficient magnetic attractive force. Accordingly, the rejections using Grundmann have been maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MELODY M BURCH whose telephone number is (571)272-7114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30AM-3PM, generally.
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.
mmb
June 9, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights