Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/554,045

DISC BRAKE DEVICE FOR RAILWAY VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 05, 2023
Examiner
SAHNI, VISHAL R
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Nippon Steel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
731 granted / 970 resolved
+23.4% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
1016
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§102
33.1%
-6.9% vs TC avg
§112
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 970 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION This is a first Non-Final Office Action on the merits in response to the application filed 10/05/23. This application claims priority to a PCT filed 05/14/21. Claims 1-6 are currently pending yet all are rejected due to the section 102, 103 and 112 rejections detailed below. 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 1-6 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 1-6 are rejected because the last limitation of claim 1 recites that a peripheral edge of the through hole is dispose on “an outer circumferential side of a peripheral edge of the small diameter portion of the first fastening hole.” It is unclear where this “outer circumferential side” of an edge of a hole is located specifically. Is Applicant referring to a --radially outer-- side of the peripheral edge of the small diameter portion? But both the inner and outer radial sides of the edge of the small diameter portion are adjacent the edge of the through hole. It’s unclear what specific portion of this small diameter portion Applicant is referring to. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Kondo Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kondo et al. (WO 2019/194203) (cited by Applicant). Kondo is directed to a brake disk unit for a railway vehicle. See Abstract. Note: Kondo is an “X” reference in the cited ISA Written Opinion. Claim 1: Kondo discloses a disc brake device [Figs. 1, 2] for a railway vehicle [see Title], the disc brake device comprising: a rotary member (102) to be attached to an axle (101) of the railway vehicle; a brake disc (10) including a disc body (20) having an annular shape and a plurality of fins (24, 26), the disc body having a rear surface that faces the rotary member, the plurality of fins being disposed on the rear surface in a radial shape; a control member (30, 32, 34) including a base plate (32) and a protruding portion (34), the base plate being sandwiched between the rotary member and the plurality of fins, the protruding portion protruding from the base plate toward the disc body, and being positioned between, among the plurality of fins, fins disposed adjacent to each other in a circumferential direction of the brake disc, the control member being configured to control an airflow rate between the fins disposed adjacent to each other; and a fastening member (14) configured to fasten the brake disc and the control member to the rotary member, wherein at least one of the plurality of fins has a first fastening hole (60) including a large diameter portion (top of 60) and a small diameter portion (bottom of 60), a head portion of the fastening member being disposed in the large diameter portion, the small diameter portion having a diameter smaller than a diameter of the large diameter portion, a shaft portion of the fastening member being inserted through the small diameter portion, the base plate has a through hole that is provided corresponding to the first fastening hole and through which the shaft portion is inserted [see Fig. 1 (head of 14 in large area of 60, shaft of 14 in small area of 60 and hole of 30)], and a peripheral edge of the through hole is disposed on an outer circumferential side of a peripheral edge of the small diameter portion of the first fastening hole [see Fig. 1 (small area of 60 adjacent hole of 30)]. See Figs. 1, 2, 10. Claim 2: Kondo discloses that the rotary member has a second fastening hole (hole in 102a receiving 14) that is provided corresponding to the first fastening hole and the through hole, and through which the shaft portion is inserted, and the peripheral edge of the through hole is disposed on an outer circumferential side of a peripheral edge of the second fastening hole. See Figs. 1, 2. Claims 4-6: Kondo discloses that a width of the through hole in the circumferential direction is smaller than a maximum width of a top surface of the fin having the first fastening hole. See Fig. 2b. 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. Kondo Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo. Claim 3: Kondo is relied upon as in claims 1 and 2 above but do not discuss the specific measurements of the various components, including the distance between the edges of the two fastening holes. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention for the distance between the edges of the two fastening holes to be more than 2 mm because it is ultimately a design choice, based on the size of the disc brake. Furthermore, there is no criticality in this range, and would also be obvious to try given that only limited possibilities exist here – either at, above or below 2mm. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL R SAHNI whose telephone number is (571)270-3838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm PST. 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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. VISHAL SAHNI Primary Examiner Art Unit 3657 /VISHAL R SAHNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 05, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600335
TRAILER BRAKING THROUGH TRAILER SUPPLY LINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590613
PAD SHIELD FOR DISC BRAKE SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR THE USE AND ASSEMBLY THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584527
BRAKE CALIPER WITH A COVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576822
SYSTEM FOR CONTROLLING AN ELECTRIC PARKING BRAKE BY PULSE WIDTH MODULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577996
BRAKE SYSTEMS HAVING BACK PLATES WITH THERMAL MANAGEMENT FEATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
75%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+19.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 970 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