Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/528,964

DISK BRAKE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE WITH OPTIMIZED RETRACTION OF AT LEAST ONE BRAKE PAD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 05, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, TAN QUANG
Art Unit
3661
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
ZF Active Safety GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
1025 granted / 1132 resolved
+38.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
1151
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
35.4%
-4.6% vs TC avg
§102
43.7%
+3.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1132 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAIL ACTION Notice to Applicant(s) This application has been examined. Claims 1-16 are pending. The prior art submitted on December 05, 2023 has been considered. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. § 119, which have been placed of record in the file. 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) A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, nowwitstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sekiya et al. (2009/0008193) in view of Thomas (2018/0001878) As per claim 1, Sekiya et al. disclose a disk brake for a motor vehicle which includes a brake caliper (see at least figure 2, item 5; paragraph 0047), a brake carrier (see at least figure 2) by which the brake caliper is supported, a brake disk which can be coupled for conjoint rotation with a vehicle wheel (see the abstract; paragraph 0021), a first brake pad and a second brake pad between which the brake disk is mounted, wherein the brake pads are each spaced apart from the brake disk by means of a retraction force (see at least figure 2, item 6; paragraph 0056), a brake piston connected to a pressure source, said brake piston being sealingly displaceably guided in the brake caliper of the disk brake in order to effect a relative movement between the respective brake pad and the brake disk by means of an applied force provided by the pressure source, so that the brake pads can be brought into contact with the brake disk (see at least figure 2; paragraphs 0047-0050), an electromagnet is connected to at least one of the brake pads in order to generate the retraction force acting on the at least one brake pad (see at least figures 11-19). Seikiya et al. do not explicitly disclose that the electromagnet having a coil (50, 60) and a coil core (52, 62) movably arranged in the coil which is connected to the brake carrier. However, such limitation is taught in at least figures 4, 5, 9, paragraphs 0035, 0061, 0067, 0068, 0070, 0073, 0075 of the Thomas reference. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Thomas into the system of Seikiya et al. with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide the system with the enhanced capacity of using the electromagnet having coil and coil core in order to generate great retraction force acting on at least one brake pad. As per claim 5, Thomas disclose that the coil core is integrally connected, preferably adhesively bonded to a backing plate of the at least one brake pad (see at least figure 4, 5 and 9). Claims 2-4 and 6-16 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. Conclusion Claims 1 and 5 are rejected. Claims 2-4 and 6-16 are objected. The following references are cited as being of general interest: Hoffman et al. (3,827,535), Wang (6,250,437), Al-Mahshi et al. (2018/0013332), Gerber et al. (2023/0175564) and Van De Vorst et al. (2023/02283304). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAN QUANG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6966. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Thursday from 7:00am to 5:30pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Nolan, can be reached at 570-270-7016. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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. February 6, 2026 /TAN Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600408
TURNING CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601602
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MULTI-DESTINATION CONTRACTION HIERARCHY PATH SEARCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597301
VEHICLE SENSOR CLEANING APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583331
BATTERY ELECTRIC VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583405
VEHICLE MODIFICATIONS TO OPTIMIZE AN OCCUPANT’S CONDITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
90%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+7.1%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1132 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