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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, filed 7/31/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 in view of Bingle US 20160123045 A1, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that 38 of the prior art reference is not an intermediate member that transmits a constraint applied to the handle to the sensor. P0020 of Bingle directly explains that 38 is an intermediate member that transmits a constraint applied to the handle to the sensor. Applicant also argues that the prior art reference in question does not teach the newly amended limitation “a sensor configured to be attached to an extension portion of the handle, the extension portion and the rest of the handle being in one piece and/or attached to a bracket”. Examiner disagrees, see rejection below.
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, 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bingle US 20160123045 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Bingle teaches: A car access assembly (10) comprising: a handle (16) configured to be attached on a car door (Fig 1, 12); and an electronic sensing unit (Fig 3, 40, 42, 50) comprising: a sensor (40 is a sensor as described in P0019) configured to be attached to an extension portion of the handle (Fig 3, extension portion is right portion of handle 16 which faces gasket 28. Sensor 40 is attached to the extension portion via 32), the extension portion and the rest of the handle being in one piece (shown in Fig 3) and/or attached to a bracket (38) cooperating with the handle (shown in Fig 3, bracket 38 is attached to extension portion of handle via 32) to transmit a constraint applied to the handle (P0020), wherein the at least one of the extension portion and/or the bracket is configured to be installed on or facing an internal side of a part of the car door (Fig 3, the right portion of handle 16 that faces gasket 28, is facing an internal side of part of car door 26; bracket 38 is shown installed on an internal side of car door 12) extending according to a reference plane (Fig 3, both the right portion of the handle 16 that faces gasket 28 and the bracket 38 extend along a plane that extends horizontally and out of the page in Fig 3, this plane being the reference plane); and a fixing mechanism for the sensor (Fig 3, 32), the fixing mechanism being configured to attach together to the part of the car door, the at least one of the extension portion and/or the bracket, and the sensor (Fig 3, fixing mechanism 32 is shown to attach the right portion of handle 16 that faces gasket 28 to the part of the car door 12; and fixing mechanism 32 is also shown to attach the bracket 38 and the sensor 40 to the internal side of the car door 12) so that a constraint applied to the handle is transmitted to the sensor for detection of a command via the at least one of the extension portion and/or the bracket (P0020).
Regarding Claim 3, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 1, wherein the at least one of the extension portion of the handle and the bracket extends parallel to the reference plane (Fig 3, the bracket 38 extends parallel to the reference plane, which is the plane that extends horizontally and out of the page in Fig 3), wherein the at least one of the extension portion and the bracket is located between the internal side and the sensor transversally to the reference plane (Fig 3, bracket 38 is shown located between the internal side of door 12 and sensor 40, lying across the reference plane.)
Regarding Claim 6, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 1, wherein the fixing mechanism comprises a main fastener (Fig 3, right 32 of fixing mechanism is a main fastener) which is configured to extend according to a main direction transversal to the reference plane (See annotated Fig 3), the main fastener being configured to cooperate with the sensor, the at least one of the extension portion and the bracket, the part of the car door and the handle (Fig 3 shows right 32, the main fastener, cooperating with the sensor 40, bracket 38, car door 12, and handle 16 to hold them all together.
PNG
media_image1.png
496
811
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding Claim 7, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 6, further comprising a support of the sensor (Fig 3, 36 of main fastener that is the right 32, acts as a support of the sensor), wherein the at least one of the extension portion and the bracket, and the part of the car door each presents a corresponding through opening for passage of the main fastener (Fig 3, right 32 that is the main fastener is shown extending through openings in the bracket 38 and car door 12 allowing for passage of the main fastener through them).
Regarding Claim 8, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 6, wherein the handle comprises a socket adapted to cooperate with the main fastener(Fig 3 shows main fastener that is right 32 screwed into a space in the handle 16, this space being a socket).
Regarding Claim 9, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 8 wherein the main fastener is a screw and the socket includes a threaded portion (Fig 3, main fastener right 32 is shown as a screw and the space within the handle 16 that is the socket is threaded to accept the threaded shaft 36 of the screw).
Regarding Claim 10, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 1, wherein the electronic sensing unit comprises two distinct sensors and two corresponding fixing mechanisms (Fig 4, there are two distinct sensors, right 40 and left 40, each having a right 32 and left 32 respectively that are the two corresponding fixing mechanisms).
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) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Bingle US 20160123045 A1.
Regarding Claim 2, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 1, wherein the sensor includes at least one gauge that measures strain (P0020), wherein the at least one gauge that measures strain is configured to be deformed when the constraint is applied to the handle (P0020). Bingle does not explicitly teach that the sensor is a strain gauge, however indicator 40 performs the functions of a strain gauge. Furthermore Bingle teaches that the sensor can be any type that can detect a change in disposition of the handle (Bingle: P0019). Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the sensor taught by Bingle can be a strain gauge as it Is also a sensor that can detect a change in disposition of the handle.
Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Bingle US 20160123045 A1, in view of Dualka DE 102016123724 A1.
Regarding Claim 4, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 3. Bingle does not teach: wherein the at least one of the extension portion and the bracket presents a recess adapted to receive the sensor. Dualka teaches that it is known in the art to have a handle (Dualka: 14) with an extension portion (Dualka: 28) that has a recess (Dualka: Fig 3, cutout of 28 that 16 sits in) to receive a sensor (Dualka: Fig 3 shows sensor 16 received in the recess of extension portion 28 of handle 14). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Bingle to have a recess for the sensor as taught by Dualka, resulting in a bracket with a recess for the sensor, thereby increasing compactness of the assembly.
Regarding Claim 5, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 1. Bingle does not teach: wherein the at least one of the extension portion and the bracket presents a recess adapted to receive the sensor. Dualka teaches that it is known in the art to have a handle (Dualka: 14) with an extension portion (Dualka: 28) that has a recess (Dualka: Fig 3, cutout of 28 that 16 sits in) to receive a sensor (Dualka: Fig 3 shows sensor 16 received in the recess of extension portion 28 of handle 14). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Bingle to have a recess for the sensor as taught by Dualka, resulting in a bracket with a recess for the sensor, thereby increasing compactness of the assembly.
Claim(s) 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Bingle US 20160123045 A1, in view of Herman US 20230258030 A1.
Regarding Claim 11, Bingle teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 1, wherein the electronic sensing unit comprises a further sensor (Fig 4, left 40) mounted on an internal side of the part of the car door (Fig 4), the car access assembly including a further fixing element for maintaining the further sensor on the internal side (Fig 4, left 32, 36). Bingle does not teach: a further sensor mounted on an external side of the part of the car door, including a further fixing element for maintaining the further sensor on the external side. Herman teaches that it is known in the art to have a second sensor (Herman: sensor 82 is one or more sensors as described in P0032) mounted on the external side (31, P0015) of the part of the car door (Herman: 14) (Herman: Fig 1C and Fig 4 show the sensor 83 mounted on the external side 31 of car door 14). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Bingle so that the further sensor, (Bingle: left 40 in Fig 4), is mounted on the external side of the part of the car door between the external side of the car door and the door handle, resulting in easier installation of the car access assembly.
Regarding Claim 12, Bingle, in view of Herman, teaches: The car access assembly according to Claim 11, wherein, the further fixing element includes a first part (Bingle: Fig 4, ;eft 36 of the further fixing element) adapted to be received in a further recess of the handle (Fig 4, further recess is the portion of handle that receives the first part 36 of further fixing element) and a second part configured to cooperate with the first part (Fig 4, left 32 is a second part that cooperates with the first part 36).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER F CALLAHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5847. The examiner can normally be reached Mon through Thur 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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.
/C.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights