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) 1-3, 6, 11, 14, and 15 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 figures 2A and 3 (Grundmann notes in the paragraph following “(38)” that EPMs 302A-E in figure 3 are similar to EPM 200 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 314, 324, and at least one of the magnets of 302E comprising a magnetic target section, 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 and particularly portion 324 frictionally brakes an output member 326 that is at least one of rotatable or linearly movable or particularly rotatable in correspondence with opening (brake releasing direction) and closing (braking direction) of an access member or brake pedal, for example, as broadly and functionally recited.
Re: claims 2 and 3. Grundmann shows in figure 3 wherein the brake element is forced towards the released by a releasing spring 318.
Re: claims 6 and 15. Grundmann shows in figure 3 an arrangement for controlling movements of an access member relative to a frame, the arrangement comprising a brake device according to claim 1 arranged to brake the access member or brake pedal since, as broadly recited, once the brake element contacts the output member, it stops the brake pedal from being depressed further. With regard to claim 15, the frame is the frame of the vehicle, as broadly recited.
Re: claim 11. Grundmann shows in figure 3 the arrangement further comprising a transmission or one of elements 302 arranged to transmit a movement of the access member or brake pedal to a movement of the output member 326.
Re: claim 14. Grundmann shows in figure 3 wherein the transmission or one of elements 302 is a speed increasing transmission since it moves the brake element from stationary or speed being zero to a non-zero amount when it is triggered to move the brake element toward the output member, as broadly recited.
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) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundmann in view of DE-10109141 (DE’141).
Re: claim 16. Grundmann 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 or brake released 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 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 or braked position.
Claim(s) 8, 9, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundmann in view of WO-2020259935 (WO’935).
Re: claims 8 and 9. Grundmann 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 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.
Re: claim 17. Grundmann, as modified, teaches in figure 3 of Grundmann the arrangement further comprising a transmission or one of elements 302 arranged to transmit a movement of the access member or brake pedal to a movement of the output member 326.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7, 12, 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.
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 9/11/26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection do not rely on the interpretation of the base reference used in the prior rejection of record.
Conclusion
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
September 16, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights