Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/385,097

BRAKE ASSEMBLY COMPRISING DEVICE FOR GENERATING WARNING SIGNAL

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 30, 2023
Examiner
RASHID, MAHBUBUR
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
HL Mando Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
574 granted / 856 resolved
+15.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
894
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
45.1%
+5.1% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 856 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/30/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --A brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: “System” in line 1 should be --A system--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake caliper housing” in line 1 should be --A brake caliper housing--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake pad” in line 1 should be --A brake pad--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Brake pad carrier” in line 1 should be --A brake pad carrier--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a brake assembly” in line 1 should be --the brake assembly--. 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 10-11 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. Regarding claim 10, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1-8 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (KR 20090012681 A). Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a brake assembly (note figs. 1-3) for braking a vehicle wheel, the brake assembly comprising at least one device (1-4 in fig. 2) that is configured to generate an acoustic and/or a visual warning signal. Re-claim 2, Kim discloses the brake assembly is a brake caliper assembly comprising a brake caliper housing (53) and a brake pad carrier (51). Re-claim 3, Kim discloses the device is arranged in a recess, the recess being provided in one of the brake caliper housing and the brake pad carrier (note the sensor 1 is located on the recess portion of the caliper housing (53)(50) shown in fig. 1). Re-claim 4, Kim discloses the recess is provided in an outwardly facing surface of the respective one of the one of the brake caliper housing and brake pad carrier, said surface facing away from a brake disc that is to be braked by the brake assembly (note the sensor 1 is located on the recess portion of the caliper housing (53)(50) shown in fig. 1). Re-claim 5, Kim discloses the device is arranged at a surface comprised by a finger portion of the brake caliper housing or at another outwardly facing surface of the brake caliper housing or brake pad carrier (note the sensor 1 is located on the finger portion (53) of the caliper housing (53)(50) shown in fig. 1). Re-claim 6, Kim discloses the device (1 in fig. 1) is arranged at a surface comprised by a bridge section of the brake caliper housing. Re-claim 7, Kim discloses the device (1 in fig. 1) is arranged at a surface comprised by a trailing edge portion of the brake caliper housing or by a leading edge portion of the brake caliper housing. Re-claim 8, Kim discloses the brake assembly further comprises an electric line (note the line connected to the sensor 1 shown in fig. 2) connected to the device (1), this electric line being flexible to compensate for a movement of the device when operating the brake assembly. Re-claim 13, Kim discloses the a control unit (2), the control unit being configured to generate signals prompting the device to generate the warning signal. Re-claim 14, Kim discloses the device (1 in fig. 1) is arranged at the brake caliper housing. Re-claim 15, Kim discloses the device (55) is arranged at the brake pad. Claims 1-2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ruiz (CA 3128652 A1). Regarding claim 1, Ruiz discloses a brake assembly (note figs. 1-5) for braking a vehicle wheel, the brake assembly comprising at least one device (54) that is configured to generate an acoustic and/or a visual warning signal. Re-claim 2, Ruiz discloses the brake assembly is a brake caliper assembly comprising a brake caliper housing (38 in fig. 2) and a brake pad carrier (30). Re-claim 10, Ruiz discloses the device is at least partially covered by a cover (86, 104, 106, 108), in particular wherein the cover is movable. Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kobayashi et al. (US 11,338,746 B2). Regarding claims 1 and 9, Kobayashi et al. discloses an electric brake, a pair of signal lines connected to a sensor that measures the rotation speed of a wheel, a pair of power lines connected to a brake caliper, a pair of signal lines and a pair of power lines disclosed is the use of a composite cable having a sheath that collectively covers the wires (note the abstract, fig. 6 and col. 1, lines 10-15). Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu (CN 208966932 U). Regarding claims 1 and 12, Yu discloses a drum brake assembly (fig. 2) for braking a vehicle wheel, the brake assembly comprising at least one device (5-8) that is configured to generate an acoustic and/or a visual warning signal. 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. 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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20090012681 A). Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses all claimed limitations as set forth above including the device is arranged at the brake caliper but fails to disclose the device to be arranged at the pad carrier as recited in the claim. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the filing date of the present application was made to arrange the sensor device of Kim at the pad carrier, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art as such arrangement of the device would protect the device from harsh environment and thus prolong the life of the device. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 11 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHBUBUR RASHID whose telephone number is (571)272-7218. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am to 10pm 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, ROBERT SICONOLFI can be reached at 5712727124. 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. /MAHBUBUR RASHID/Examiner, Art Unit 3616 /Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 30, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590611
SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING A BRAKE FORCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584528
BRAKE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583425
BRAKE SYSTEM WITH SAFER EMERGENCY STOP FUNCTION AND METHOD FOR SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578005
FLUID-FILLED VIBRATION DAMPING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571439
CALIPER BRAKE
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
67%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+20.4%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 856 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