Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/520,053

VEHICLE SENSOR CLEANING SYSTEM INCLUDING AN AIR SUPPLY MODULE INTEGRATED WITH A WASHING LIQUID SUPPLY MODULE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 27, 2023
Examiner
ZHOU, QINGZHANG
Art Unit
3752
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Dong Hee Industrial Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
551 granted / 817 resolved
-2.6% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
871
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.0%
+7.0% vs TC avg
§102
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 817 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-8 in the reply filed on November 12, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 9-18 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on November 12, 2025. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “integrated cleaning module of a vehicle sensor.” It is suggested to amend to -integrated cleaning module configured to clean a vehicle sensor- for clarification. 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. Claim 3-8 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 recites “the air flow path and the cleaning liquid flow path are separated such that movement of the fluid is blocked.” The phrase “movement of the fluid is blocked” renders the scope of the claim unclear and indefinite. It is ambiguous which “fluid” is being referred to, as both air and cleaning liquid are fluids. Further, it is unclear which the claim intends to block: movement of fluid within the respective flow paths, movement of fluid between the air flow path and the cleaning liquid flow path, or all fluid movement entirely. As written, the claim appears inconsistent because each flow path is described as a path through which fluid “moves,” yet the claim also recites that “movement of the fluid is blocked.” One of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to reasonably determine the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. As a result, claim 3 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter regarded as the invention. Claims 4-8 are also rejected under 112(b) because of dependency on claim 3. 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. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Davies et al. (WO 2015/120866 A1). With regard to claim 1, Davies discloses an integrated cleaning module (Fig. 3) of a vehicle sensor (1), the integrated cleaning module (Fig. 3) comprising: a washing liquid supply module configured to supply cleaning liquid (page 12 line 25); and an air supply module (12) connected to the washing liquid supply module and configured to supply air (Fig. 3), wherein the air supply module includes: a compressor (12) configured to generate compressed air (Page 15 lines 16-22); an air tank (27) in which the compressed air generated by the compressor is stored; and an integrated dispenser (3/4) configured to be in fluid connection with the washing liquid supply module (Fig. 3) and the air tank (27), wherein the integrated dispenser (3/4) is configured to distribute the cleaning liquid and the compressed air (Fig. 3). With regard to claim 2, the device of Davies discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above. Davies further discloses that wherein the washing liquid supply module includes a cleaning liquid tank (“cleaning fluid source” page 12 line 25) configured to store the cleaning liquid and a pump (8) configured to transfer the cleaning liquid stored in the cleaning liquid tank to the integrated dispenser (Fig .3), and wherein the integrated dispenser (3/4) is configured to be in fluid connection with the pump (8) through a pipe (pipe between 5 and 9 shown in Fig. 3). With regard to claim 3, the device of Davies discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 2 above. Davies further discloses that wherein the integrated dispenser (3/4) includes an air flow path (16) through which the compressed air supplied from the air tank (27) moves and a cleaning liquid flow path (5) through which the cleaning liquid supplied from the pump (8) of the washing liquid supply module moves, and wherein the air flow path (16) and the cleaning liquid flow path (5) are separated such that movement of the fluid is blocked (Fig. 3). With regard to claim 4, the device of Davies discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Davies further discloses that the integrated dispenser (3/4) includes an air inlet port (t-connector 6 of air path, Fig. 3) and at least one air distribution port (4) communicating with the air flow path (16), and wherein the air inlet port (6) is connected to the air tank (27) through a pipe (15). With regard to claim 5, the device of Davies discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 4 above. Davies further discloses that the integrated dispenser (3/4) includes a cleaning liquid inlet port (t-connector 6 of cleaning fluid path, Fig. 3) and at least one cleaning liquid distribution port (3) communicating with the cleaning liquid flow path (5), and wherein the cleaning liquid inlet port (6) is connected to the pump (8) through a pipe (7). 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. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davies et al. in view of Rachow (US 2022/0009453 A1). With regard to claim 1, Davies discloses an integrated cleaning module of a vehicle sensor (1), the integrated cleaning module (Fig. 3) comprising: a washing liquid supply module configured to supply cleaning liquid (page 12 line 25); and an air supply module (12) connected to the washing liquid supply module and configured to supply air (Fig. 3); and an integrated dispenser (3/4) configured to be in fluid connection with the washing liquid supply module (Fig. 3) and the air tank (27), wherein the integrated dispenser (3/4) is configured to distribute the cleaning liquid and the compressed air (Fig. 3). Davies is silent to disclose that the air supply module includes: a compressor configured to generate compressed air; an air tank in which the compressed air generated by the compressor is stored. Rachow teaches an integrated cleaning module of a vehicle sensor comprising an air supply module includes: a compressor configured to generate compressed air; an air tank in which the compressed air generated by the compressor is stored (“compressor or air tank” , see Par. [0178]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air supply module, by incorporating the compressor and air tank as taught by Rachow, for the purpose of providing a consistent and reliable air pressure and cost efficiency over time. With regard to claims 2-5, the device f Davies as modified by Rachow discloses the claimed invention as disclosed in the rejections above. With regard to claim 6, the device of Davies as modified by Rachow discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 5 above. Davies does not disclose that the integrated dispenser includes a body in which at least one solenoid valve is disposed and an upper cover coupled to an upper portion of the body, wherein the air flow path, the air inlet port, and the at least one air distribution port are formed on one side of the upper cover, and wherein the cleaning liquid flow path, the cleaning liquid inlet port, and the at least one cleaning liquid distribution port are formed on another side of the upper cover. Rachow teaches an integrated cleaning module of a vehicle sensor (Fig. 9), the integrated cleaning module comprising an integrated dispenser (26) includes a body (Fig. 9) in which at least one solenoid valve (28E, Par. [0208]) is disposed and an upper cover (44) coupled to an upper portion of the body (Fig. 10), wherein an air flow path (26F), an air inlet port (290), and at least one air distribution port (154) are formed on one side of the upper cover (side surface of the upper cover, see Fig. 11), and wherein a cleaning liquid flow path (26J), a cleaning liquid inlet port (288), and at least one cleaning liquid distribution port (160) are formed on another side of the upper cover (top surface of the upper cover, see Fig. 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the integrated cleaning module of Davies, by arranging the air flow path (26F), the air inlet port (290), and the at least one air distribution port (154) are formed on one side of the upper cover (side surface of the upper cover, see Fig. 11), and wherein the cleaning liquid flow path (26J), the cleaning liquid inlet port (288), and the at least one cleaning liquid distribution port (160) are formed on another side of the upper cover and employing the solenoid valve (28E) as taught by Rachow, for the benefit of positioning the spray nozzles at proper angles to spray cleaning fluid onto the sensor effectively (Par. [0035]). With regard to claim 7, the device of Davies as modified by Rachow discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 6 above. Davies further discloses that the at least one air distribution port includes a plurality of air distribution ports (4, Fig. 3), the at least one cleaning liquid distribution port includes a plurality of cleaning liquid distribution ports (3, Fig. 3), and the at least one valve includes a plurality of valves (Page 17 line 10), and wherein the plurality of valves are provided in correspondence with a number of and positions of the plurality of air distribution ports (Page 17 lines 9-10), and a number of and positions of the plurality of cleaning liquid distribution ports (Fig. 3). Davies does not disclose the check valves are solenoid valves. Rachow teaches that the check valve comprises a solenoid actuator (Par. [0027]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valves of Davies, by including solenoid actuators as taught by Rachow, for the purpose of electronically controlling ingress of air and fluid (Par. [0209]). With regard to claim 8, the device of Davies as modified by Rachow discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 7 above. Rachow further discloses that a support plate (30) on which the air supply module and the washing liquid supply module are mounted (Fig. 1), wherein the air supply module and the washing liquid supply module are integrally assembled to the support plate (Fig. 9). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-1163. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM-5PM. 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, ARTHUR HALL can be reached at 5712701814. 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. JOEL . ZHOU Primary Examiner Art Unit 3752 /QINGZHANG ZHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 27, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599917
SHOWER HEAD CAPABLE OF BEING RAPIDLY ASSEMBLED
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582856
FIRE SUPPRESSION ARRANGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582575
EYE RINSING ELEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582213
BEAUTY EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569869
Method of Determining Characteristic of Fluid, Control System, Apparatus and Robot System
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
92%
With Interview (+24.3%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 817 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