Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/453,130

VEHICLE ROOF STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING VEHICLE ROOF STRUCTURE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Aug 21, 2023
Examiner
BLANKENSHIP, GREGORY A
Art Unit
3612
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Aisin Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
1388 granted / 1629 resolved
+33.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1677
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
38.6%
-1.4% vs TC avg
§102
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§112
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1629 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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 3-6, 10, 11, 13, and 14 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 3 is not clearly understood because “the second upper wall extends to an upper side than the first upper wall” is unclear. 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 1, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hattori et al. (US 2017/0080788) in view of Kokubo (US 2015/0273991). Hattori et al. discloses a vehicle roof structure comprising a frame (13,14) defining an opening portion (11) that is opened and closed by a movable panel (12), as shown in Figures 1 and 2 and disclosed in paragraphs [0019-0020]. A deflector device (20) includes a deflector (20) and a torsion spring (40), as shown in Figures 3A and 3B. The deflector (20) is supported to rotate around an axis (0) extending in a width direction, as shown in Figure 2 and disclosed in paragraph [0021]. The deflector (20) rotates between a retracted position, as shown in Figure 6B, and a deployed position, as shown in Figure 6A, that is more displaced upward relative to the opening portion (11) than the retracted position. The torsion spring (40) includes a coil portion (41), a first arm portion (42) that extends from a first end of the coil portion (41), and a second arm that extends from a second end of the coil portion (41), as shown in Figure 3A and 3B and disclosed in paragraph [0032]. The torsion spring (40) is elastically compressed and deformed as the deflector (20) is displaced from the deployed position toward the retracted position, as disclosed in paragraph [0032]. The frame (13,14) includes a first spring support portion (16) that supports the first arm (42) of the torsion spring (40) in such a way as to be movable in a front-rear direction, as shown in Figures 6A and 6B. The deflector (20) includes a second spring support portion (24) that supports the coil portion (41) and the second arm of the torsion spring (40), as shown in Figures 3A, 3B, 6A, and 6B and disclosed in paragraph [0032]. The first spring support portion (16) includes a guide surface on which the first arm (42) slides, as shown in Figures 6A and 6B. PNG media_image1.png 267 428 media_image1.png Greyscale When the deflector (20) rotates toward the retracted position, the first arm (42) slides on the guide surface and is thereby shifted to a state of being supported by the first spring support portion (16), as shown in Figures 3A, 3B, 6A, and 6B and disclosed in paragraph [0032]. In reference to claim 8, a spring temporary assembly step of causing the second spring support portion (24) to support the coil portion (41), as shown in Figures 3A, 3B, 6A, and 6B. The deflector (20) is rotated toward the retracted position causing the first arm (42) to slide on the guide surface and be supported by the first spring support portion, as shown in Figures 6A and 6B. Kokubo teaches providing a holding portion (23a) on the deflector (21) to hold a first arm (28) of a torsion spring (26), as shown in Figures 3A-4B and disclosed in paragraph [0026]. In reference to claim 7, the holding portion (23a) holds the first arm (28) in a state of making the torsion spring (26) elastically compressed and deformed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a holding portion on the deflector of Hattori, as taught by Kokubo, with a reasonable expectation for success to help retain the spring during assembly. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 9, and 12 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. Claims 3-6, 10, 11, 13, and 14 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claims 2 and 9 is the lower wall extending longer in the front-rear direction than the upper wall, which is not found in the prior art of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30. 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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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. GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP Primary Examiner Art Unit 3612 /GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 November 20, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 21, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600310
FRONT END MODULE FRAME OF VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600414
VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600321
DEFROSTER INTERIOR STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600417
TAILGATE ACCESSIBILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594899
STRUCTURAL MEMBER FOR FRONT BOX WITH INTEGRAL FLUID LINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
85%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+2.9%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1629 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