Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/291,591

A BRAKE CONTROL DEVICE FOR HIGH-RISE FIRE RESCUE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jan 24, 2024
Examiner
NEJAD, MAHDI H
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Zhuhai Suoqi Electronic Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 12m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
442 granted / 602 resolved
+3.4% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
648
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
40.8%
+0.8% vs TC avg
§102
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§112
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 602 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on Chinese Application PCT/CN2022/133236 dated 11/21/2022 and applicant has filed a certified copy of this Chinese application on 01/24/2024. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the input shaft 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 1-5, 7-8 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 5, “to achieve synchronous rotation.” should read --to achieve synchronous rotation;--. Claim 2, should read --the A cable take-up device (2) and the B cable take-up device (4) each includes two cable take-up drums (14), an inner side of each cable take-up drum (14) is provided with drive gear one (15), both ends of the input shaft (9) are provided with drive gear two (16), the drive member (11) is a sprocket, and the drive gear one (15) and the drive gear two (16) are connected to each other by the sprocket.-- Claim 3, line 6, limitation “a connecting horizontal plate (19). between” should read --a connecting horizontal plate (19); between--. Claim 3, lines 7-8, “the central part of the connecting square pipe (21)” should read --a central part of the connecting square pipe (21)--. Claim 3, line 11, “at least two adjusting bolts (24) The adjusting bolts (24)” should read --at least two adjusting bolts (24), the Claim 4, “the A transfer spindle (5) or B transfer spindle (6)” should read --the A transfer spindle (5) or the B transfer spindle (6)--. Claim 5, “the connection device (7) should read --the connecting device (7)”. Claim 7, “the connection device (7) should read --the connecting device (7)”. Claim 7, lines 8-9, “the pin hole modules. Both the end of the A transfer spindle (5) and the end of the B transfer spindle” should read --the pin hole modules, both the end of the A transfer spindle (5) and the end of the B transfer spindle--. Claim 8, lines 3-5, “the inner side of the first connecting column sleeve, the diameter of the first connecting column sleeve being larger than the diameter of the second connecting column sleeve, the outer side of the first connecting column sleeve--.” should read -- an inner side of the first connecting column sleeve, a diameter of the first connecting column sleeve being larger than a diameter of the second connecting column sleeve, an outer side of the first connecting column sleeve--. Claim 8, line 10, “the inner wall of the hollow cavity” should read --an inner wall of the hollow cavity--. Claim 10, line 11, “bump slides. The first connecting post sleeve” should read --bump slides, the first connecting post sleeve Claim 10 should read --the brake disc (28) and the brake drum (30) being mounted on the same axis, the brake disc (28) being mounted on the output shaft --.Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-10 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the A transfer spindle” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --an A transfer spindle--. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the B transfer spindle” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --a B transfer spindle--. Claim 1 recites the limitation “The emergency braking device comprises” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because “emergency braking device comprises” is not earlier recited. It is not clear if applicant intended to claim --the braking control device--. Claim 1 recites “the high-rise fire rescue device comprising” in lines 1-2. Claim 1 earlier recites “a high-rise fire rescue system” in line 1. It is not clear if they are the same or different. Claims 2-10 are rejected due to dependency on rejected claim 1. Claim 2 recites “A cable take-up device” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because this limitation is earlier recited in claim 1. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --the A cable take-up device--. Claim 2 recites “B cable take-up device” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because this limitation is earlier recited in claim 1. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --the B cable take-up device--. Claim 3 recites “a side stand plate (18) is provided at both ends of the mounting base (17), a connecting horizontal plate (19) is provided at the upper end of one of the side stand plates (18)” in lines 3-5 which is indefinite. Because it is not clear how many side stand plates are claimed. Also there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the lower end” in line 2.For the purpose of this examination and based on Fig. 4 of the invention which shows two side plates 18, examiner suggests amending the claim as below to overcome this rejection: --characterized in that a mounting base (17) is provided at a lower end of the reduction gear box (8), two side stand plates (18) are provided at both ends of the mounting base (17), a connecting horizontal plate (19) is provided at the upper end of one of the side stand plates (18)--. Claim 3 recites “a permanent magnet crane” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because this limitation is earlier recited in claim 1. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --the permanent magnet crane--. Claim 3 recites the limitation “and one end of the output shaft (10) passes through the side stand (18) and is located at the other end of the permanent magnetic crane (13)” which is indefinite. Because it is not clear if applicant the output shaft passes through only one of the side stands or both. Claim 6 recites the limitation “the rotating hand lever (131) is pierced through a mounting slot (22)”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because “mounting slot” is earlier recited in claim 1. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --the rotating hand lever (131) is pierced through the mounting slot (22)--. Claim 7 recites the limitation “two coupling sleeves (71) fixed to the end of the A transfer spindle (5) and the end of the B transfer spindle (6)” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because ends of A and B transfer spindles are not earlier claimed. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --two coupling sleeves (71) fixed to an end of the A transfer spindle (5) and an end of the B transfer spindle (6)--. Claim 7 recites the limitation “the end of the A transfer spindle (5) and the end of the B transfer spindle (6) being annularly arranged with a number of pin hole modules adapted to the pin hole modules, the end of the coupling sleeves (71) being annularly arranged with a number of pin hole modules adapted to the pin hole modules. Both the end of the A transfer spindle (5) and the end of the B transfer spindle (6) are annularly arranged with a number of pin hole modules-- which is very unclear and indefinite. Claim 8 recites the limitation “the end of the A transfer spindle (5) and the end of the B transfer spindle (6) being annularly arranged with a number of bump slides, the first connecting column sleeve and the first connecting column sleeve being provided with a hollow cavity adapted to the transfer spindle, the inner wall of the hollow cavity being arranged with a number of bump slides. The first connecting post sleeve and the first connecting post sleeve are provided with a hollow cavity adapted to the transfer spindle, and the inner wall of the hollow cavity is arrayed with a number of groove slides adapted to the bump slides”.It is not clear which transfer spindle (A or B) is claimed in two stances above. It is also not clear if “number of bump slides” are the same or different. Claim 10 recites the limitation “the brake pad (29) is mounted on the gap between the brake disc (28) and the brake drum (30)”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because “gap” is not earlier recited in the claim. Claim 10 earlier recites “a spacer”, but it is not clear if they are the same. Claim 10 recites the limitation “the spacer is mounted on the opening of the brake drum (30)”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this examination the above limitation is interpreted to be --the spacer is mounted on an opening of the brake drum (30)--. Claim 10 recites the limitation “the two tie rods (32) at both ends of the output shaft (10) are connected to the spacer (32). (32) at each end of the output shaft (10) are connected with control rods (33)” which is ambiguous. It is also not clear how many tie rods are claimed, because “a tie rod” is earlier 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. Insomuch as the claims are best understood, especially in view of the Section 112, 2nd paragraph rejections, advanced above claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su (CN 111135488 A) in view of Zhang (CN 102155508 A). Regarding claim 1, Su teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a braking control device for a high-rise fire rescue system, PNG media_image1.png 128 904 media_image1.png Greyscale the high-rise fire rescue device comprising an A cable take-up device (cable retracting device 2) mounted on a base frame A (pedestal 1) and a B cable take-up device (cable retracting device 2) mounted on a base frame B (pedestal 3), A transfer spindle (A spindle shown below which is connected to 2) on the A cable take-up device (cable retracting device 2) and the B transfer spindle (B spindle shown below which is connected to 4) of the B cable take-up device (cable retracting device 2) being connected together by a connecting device (shaft joint 5) to achieve synchronous rotation; PNG media_image2.png 88 902 media_image2.png Greyscale the emergency braking device comprises a reduction gearbox (gear box 6) located below the A cable take-up device (2) or the B cable take-up device (4) (in Fig. 2 above B is below A and therefore gear box 6 is located below cable take-up device 2), the reduction gearbox (gear box 6) comprising an input shaft and an output shaft and a gear train (transmission gear), PNG media_image3.png 104 916 media_image3.png Greyscale the input shaft and the output shaft being connected by the gear train, the input shaft being connected to the A cable take-up device (via connecting device/ shaft joint 5) or In device of Su, emergency braking mechanism is manual fictional brake (drum 73, brake disc 71 and brake pad 72) with brake pedal 81 and not a combined frictional and magnetic brake mechanism. PNG media_image4.png 1366 996 media_image4.png Greyscale Zhang teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) “a brake for combining permanent-magnetic brake with frictional brake for automobile brake or speed reduction”; the brake comprising a magnetic block provided at one end of the output shaft, and a permanent magnetic crane is provided at one end of the magnetic block. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use combination of permanent-magnetic brake and frictional brake in braking control device of the high-rise fire rescue system of Su. Doing so would reduce the abrasion of the friction block and reduce noise and heat generation. PNG media_image5.png 906 1319 media_image5.png Greyscale Insomuch as the claims are best understood, especially in view of the Section 112, 2nd paragraph rejections, advanced above claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su in view of Zhang and further in view of Liu (US 20150202469 A1). Regarding claim 2, Su does not show details of the driving mechanism. Liu teaches A cable take-up device (left side in Fig. 2) and B cable take-up device (right side in Fig. 2) both include two cable take-up drums (see drums in Fig. 14), the inner side of both cable take-up drums are provided with drive gear one (gears connected to drums for connection to the chain), both ends of the input shaft are provided with drive gear two (each chain is connected to two gears, gear one and gear 2 for transfer of power), the drive member is a sprocket, and the drive gear one and the drive gear two are connected to each other by the sprocket. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to use chain system to transfer power from the motor for lifting purposes. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3, 4 and 7 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. Claims 5 and 10 would be allowable for dependency on claim 4. Claim 6 would be allowable for dependency on claim 3. Claims 8-9 would be allowable for dependency on claim 7. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Su (CN 111135490 A) teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a braking control device for a high-rise fire rescue system, with a locking mechanism (shown in Fig. 3). PNG media_image6.png 78 900 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 918 1025 media_image7.png Greyscale Yang (CN 104453536 A) teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) an emergency push button 4 with pin hole modules 3 and pin holes 5 for activating and deactivating the clutch mechanism to activate or deactivate window lifting. PNG media_image8.png 821 434 media_image8.png Greyscale Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHDI H NEJAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-4pm EST. 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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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. MAHDI H. NEJAD Examiner Art Unit 3723 /MAHDI H NEJAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 24, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589508
ROBOT HAND, ROBOT, ROBOT SYSTEM, AND TRANSFER METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589468
ELECTRIC VISE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589469
LEVELING KNOB SYSTEM AND MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583063
PRESS PLATE MODULE, PRODUCTION LINE, AND CONTROL METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575378
WAFER HANDLING DEVICE AND SUCKER MODULE THEREOF
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+29.9%)
2y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 602 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