Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/567,066

DISC BRAKE AND PAD SPRING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 05, 2023
Examiner
MORRIS, DAVID R.
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Hitachi Astemo, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
417 granted / 508 resolved
+30.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
545
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§102
35.0%
-5.0% vs TC avg
§112
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 508 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) has been considered. 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 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 1-3, 5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mogi (JP-H05-50167 U) (Cited on the IDS of 3/5/2024) Regarding claim 1, Mogi discloses A disc brake (1) comprising: a mounting member (3) fixed to a non-rotating portion of a vehicle (vehicle body, see pgh. 0012) and provided to straddle an outer circumferential side (see fig. 4) of a disc (2); a caliper (4) provided on the mounting member to be movable in an axial direction of the disc (up and down in fig. 2); a pair of friction pads (two pads 8) provided on the mounting member (as shown) to be movable and pressed against both sides of the disc by the caliper (see pgh. 0016); and a pair of pad springs (left and right retainer 11) provided on the mounting member, wherein at least one of the pair of pad springs includes: a pad support part supporting the friction pads (11a or 11b); and a suppression part (11f) suppressing at least one of movement of the caliper in a rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in a radial direction of the disc (11f pushes on the caliper up and to the left in fig. 1, so it suppresses both movement in the rotation direction and movement in the radial direction). Regarding claim 2, Mogi discloses a first pad spring (11 on one side), which is one of the pair of pad springs, suppresses at least one of movement of the caliper in the rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in the radial direction of the disc, and a second pad spring (11 on the other side), which is the other of the pair of pad springs, suppresses at least one of movement of the caliper in the rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in the radial direction of the disc (11f pushes on the caliper up and to the left in fig. 1, and the other one would be up and to the right, so they both suppress both movement in the rotation direction and movement in the radial direction). Regarding claim 3, Mogi discloses the first pad spring is provided on the mounting member (at 11d at elast) at one end side of the friction pads in a longitudinal direction (on the right end, for example) and suppresses movement of the caliper in the rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in the radial direction of the disc (as discussed above), and the second pad spring is provided on the mounting member at the other end side of the friction pads in the longitudinal direction (the spring 11 on the left end, for example) and suppresses movement of the caliper in the rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in the radial direction of the disc (as discussed above). Regarding claim 5, Mogi discloses the caliper includes: a cylinder part (area near 4b) having a cylinder hole (4a) in which a piston (6) pressing the friction pads is accommodated (see fig. 5); a bridge part (4d) having an inner circumferential part provided to straddle an outer circumferential side of the disc from the cylinder part and which faces the friction pad side (radial inside of 4d), an outer circumferential part on a side opposite to the inner circumferential part (radial outside of 4d), a lateral part extending in the axial direction of the disc to be continuous with the outer circumferential part (4h), and an inclined part extending in the axial direction of the disc to be continuous with the lateral part and the inner circumferential part and inclined to a side of the inner circumferential part with respect to the lateral part when viewed from the axial direction of the disc (4g or 4i); and a claw part (4c) provided to face the cylinder part in an axial direction of the cylinder hole from the bridge part (as shown), and the suppression part is in contact with the inclined part (fig. 1 as shown). Regarding claim 8, Mogi discloses A disc brake (1) comprising: a mounting member (3) fixed to a non-rotating portion of a vehicle (vehicle body, see pgh. 0012) and provided to straddle an outer circumferential side of a disc (see fig. 4, at 2); a caliper (4) provided on the mounting member to be movable in an axial direction of the disc (up and down in fig. 2); a pair of friction pads (two of pads 8) provided on the mounting member to be movable and pressed against both sides of the disc by the caliper (see pgh. 0016); a first suppression member (one of springs 11) provided on the mounting member at one end side of the friction pads in a longitudinal direction (e.g. left side) and configured to suppress at least one of movement of the caliper in a rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in a radial direction of the disc (11f pushes on the caliper up and to the left in fig. 1, so it suppresses both movement in the rotation direction and movement in the radial direction); and a second suppression member (another of springs 11) provided on the mounting member at the other end side of the friction pads in the longitudinal direction (e.g. right side) and configured to suppress at least one of movement of the caliper in the rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in the radial direction of the disc (11f pushes on the caliper up and to the left in fig. 1, so it suppresses both movement in the rotation direction and movement in the radial direction). Regarding claims 9-10, Mogi discloses A pad spring (11) which is provided on a mounting member (3) in a disc brake (1) including the mounting member fixed to a non-rotating portion of a vehicle (vehicle body, see pgh. 0012) and provided to straddle an outer circumferential side of a disc (see fig. 4 at 2), a caliper (4) provided on the mounting member to be movable in an axial direction of the disc (up and down in fig. 2), and a pair of friction pads (two of pads 8) provided on the mounting member to be movable and pressed against both sides of the disc by the caliper (see pgh. 0016), the pad spring comprising: a pad support part supporting the friction pads (e.g. 11a or 11b); and a suppression part (11f) suppressing movement of the caliper in a rotation direction of the disc and movement of the caliper in a radial direction of the disc (11f pushes on the caliper up and to the left in fig. 1, so it suppresses both movement in the rotation direction and movement in the radial direction). 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. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mogi (JP-H05-50167 U) in view of Maehara et al. (WO 2011/126125 A1). Regarding claim 4, Mogi does not appear to disclose two first springs and two second springs for a total of 4 springs. Rather there is only a first and second spring that are shared by the front and back pad. Maehara teaches either having only two springs, one first and second springs (e.g. fig. 22) that are shared by the pads, or four springs, two first springs and two second springs (e.g. fig. 25), such that two of the first pad springs are provided to correspond to the pair of friction pads, and two of the second pad springs are provided to correspond to the pair of friction pads. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided separate springs for the front and rear pads to provide for additional flexibility when tuning the springs, as it may be desirable for the spring on the front or back to have different properties than the other side for balancing brake forces. Further, it is noted that such a modification amounts to constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements, which has been held to involve only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-7 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and if rewritten to overcome any 112(b) rejections, as appropriate. Reasons for allowance, if applicable, will be the subject of a separate communication to the Applicant or patent owner, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.104 and MPEP § 1302.14. Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The documents listed on the PTO-892 disclose related spring supports for brake calipers. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID MORRIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3595. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. 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. /DAVID MORRIS/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3616 /DAVID R MORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597546
SOLENOID, SOLENOID VALVE, AND SHOCK ABSORBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595021
BRAKE DEVICE FOR HUMAN-POWERED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594919
Trailer Brake Control System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12578004
SHOCK ABSORBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571440
BRAKE APPARATUS FOR VEHICLE
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
82%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+13.7%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 508 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