Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/451,204

CROSSING GATE MECHANISM WITH PROGRAMMABLE ELECTRONIC SWITCHING DEVICES

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 17, 2023
Examiner
YAO, THEODORE N
Art Unit
3676
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Siemens Mobility Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 12m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
188 granted / 278 resolved
+15.6% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+36.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
328
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
43.3%
+3.3% vs TC avg
§102
21.1%
-18.9% vs TC avg
§112
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 278 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “a least one”. This should read “at least one”. 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 9-15 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. Claims 9 and 11 recite “comprising multiple electronic switching devices.” It is unclear whether this is in addition to the previously recited “at least one electronic switching device” or whether the at least one electronic switching device is multiple devices. Claim 10 recites “one or more crossing gate arm(s)” and then later “a crossing gate arm”. It is unclear whether these are the same or different. The appropriate antecedent term or consistent nomenclature should be used. Claims 11-15 depend from claim 10 and are rejected for their dependency. 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. Claim(s) 1-4, 8, 10, 12-13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ibarra (US 20190351920 A1). Regarding claim 1, Ibarra teaches crossing gate mechanism comprising: an electric motor (Fig 4, motor 108) driving a main shaft (Fig 2, 4, shaft 112), wherein the main shaft is configured to couple to a crossing gate arm (Fig 2, gate arm 20, Para 0069), a position detection unit configured to detect a position of the main shaft (Fig 3, sensor 114), a least one electronic switching device configured to operate in different switching states (circuit 106, see Para 0068), and a programmable control unit (Fig 3, controller 102) configured to control operation of the at least one switching device based on a detected position of the main shaft (Fig 3, sensor 114 feeds controller 102) in combination with a programmed switching state for the detected position (Fig 3, switching 106 interacts with 102, see Para 0068). Regarding claim 2, Ibarra teaches wherein the position detection unit is configured to determine an angle of the main shaft (Para 0071). Regarding claim 3, Ibarra teaches wherein the programmable control unit is configured to receive angular information from the position detection unit (Fig 3) and determine, based on the angle, a position of the main shaft (Para 0071). Regarding claim 4, Ibarra teaches a user interface connected to the control unit for programming the different switching states based on different main shaft positions (Fig 3, interface 104). Regarding claim 8, Ibarra teaches wherein the position detection unit comprises at least one sensor selected from an accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, a proximity detector, a rotary encoder, and a combination thereof (Fig 3, encoder 120). Regarding claim 10, Ibarra teaches a crossing gate system comprising: one or more crossing gate arm(s) (Fig 2, gate arm 20, Para 0069), and a crossing gate mechanism (see following elements) comprising: an electric motor (Fig 4, motor 108) driving a main shaft (Fig 2, 4, shaft 112), wherein the main shaft is configured to couple to a crossing gate arm (Fig 2, gate arm 20, Para 0069), a position detection unit configured to detect a position of the main shaft (Fig 3, sensor 114), at least one electronic switching device configured to operate in different switching states (circuit 106, see Para 0068), and a programmable control unit (Fig 3, controller 102) configured to control operation of the at least one switching device based on a detected position of the main shaft (Fig 3, sensor 114 feeds controller 102) in combination with a programmed switching state for the detected position (Fig 3, switching 106 interacts with 102, see Para 0068). Regarding claim 12, Ibarra teaches wherein the programmable control unit is configured to receive angular information from the position detection unit (Fig 3) and determine, based on the angular information, a position of the main shaft (Para 0071). Regarding claim 13, Ibarra teaches a user interface connected to the control unit for programming the different switching states based on different main shaft positions or other detected information (Fig 3, interface 104). Regarding claim 15, Ibarra teaches wherein the at least one switching device is configured to provide an input for a motor control (Fig 3, input to controller and thus motor). 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. Claim(s) 5, 7, 9, 11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibarra (US 20190351920 A1), in view of Nguyen (US 20180174449 A1). Regarding claim 5, Ibarra is silent on wherein the at least one switching device comprises a solid-state relay. Nguyen teaches wherein the at least one switching device comprises a solid-state relay (Para 0424, “one or more switches such as a relay or a system to provide an analogous or equivalent digital output signal (e.g. solid state relay. etc.).”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Ibarra by having one or more solid state relays as disclosed by Nguyen because it would be a simple substitution of one known element (the electrical circuit switch) for another (solid state relays) to obtain predictable results (switching functions in electrical devices). Regarding claim 7, Ibarra teaches wherein the different switching states comprise an open state and a closed state (circuit 106 has been modified in the parent claim, see Para 0068 of Ibarra). Regarding claim 9, Ibarra is silent on multiple electronic switching devices. Nguyen teaches multiple electronic switching devices (Para 0424, “one or more switches such as a relay or a system to provide an analogous or equivalent digital output signal (e.g. solid state relay. etc.).”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Ibarra by having one or more solid state relays as disclosed by Nguyen because it would be a simple substitution of one known element (the electrical circuit switch) for another (solid state relays) to obtain predictable results (switching functions in electrical devices). Regarding claim 11, Ibarra is silent on multiple electronic switching devices. Nguyen teaches multiple electronic switching devices (Para 0424, “one or more switches such as a relay or a system to provide an analogous or equivalent digital output signal (e.g. solid state relay. etc.).”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Ibarra by having one or more solid state relays as disclosed by Nguyen because it would be a simple substitution of one known element (the electrical circuit switch) for another (solid state relays) to obtain predictable results (switching functions in electrical devices). Regarding claim 14, Ibarra is silent on wherein the at least one switching device comprises a solid-state relay or electromechanical relay. Nguyen teaches wherein the at least one switching device comprises a solid-state relay or electromechanical relay (Para 0424, “one or more switches such as a relay or a system to provide an analogous or equivalent digital output signal (e.g. solid state relay. etc.).”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Ibarra by having one or more solid state relays as disclosed by Nguyen because it would be a simple substitution of one known element (the electrical circuit switch) for another (solid state relays) to obtain predictable results (switching functions in electrical devices). Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibarra (US 20190351920 A1), in view of Sibley (US 3909632 A). Regarding claim 5, Ibarra is silent on wherein the at least one switching device comprises a solid-state relay. Sibley teaches wherein the at least one switching device comprises a solid-state relay (Column 2, line 30-31; Column 3, lines 39-50). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Ibarra by having one or more solid state relays as disclosed by Sibley because it would be a simple substitution of one known element (the electrical circuit switch) for another (solid state relays) to obtain predictable results (switching functions in electrical devices). Regarding claim 6, Ibarra as modified teaches wherein the solid-state relay utilizes power semiconductor devices to switch between the different switching states (Column 2, line 30-31; Column 3, lines 39-50 and 56-59 of Sibley). Regarding claim 7, Ibarra teaches wherein the different switching states comprise an open state and a closed state (circuit 106 has been modified in the parent claim, see Para 0068 of Ibarra). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE N YAO whose telephone number is (571)272-8745. The examiner can normally be reached typically 8am-4pm ET. 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, TARA SCHIMPF can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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. /THEODORE N YAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 17, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12577848
PRESSURE COLLAPSIBLE CLOSED CELLULAR SWELL PACKER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12557717
ROW CLEANER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560033
DEVICE FOR CENTERING A SENSOR ASSEMBLY IN A BORE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553307
EXPANDABLE METAL GAS LIFT MANDREL PLUG
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12553321
NON-EQUIDISTANT OPEN TRANSMISSION LINES FOR ELECTROMAGNETIC HEATING AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+36.9%)
2y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 278 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