Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/571,851

VEHICLE OPENING ELEMENT HANDLE ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Dec 19, 2023
Examiner
LUGO, CARLOS
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Minebea AccessSolutions France S.A.S.
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
929 granted / 1243 resolved
+22.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1294
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
41.8%
+1.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1243 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . This Office Action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 11/4/25. Claim Objections Claims 2 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2, change the term “a gripping member” to -the gripping member- since the limitation is now presented in claim 1. Claim 6, cancel the claim since the new amendment presents the limitations shown in the claim now in claim 1. 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. Claims 1-10 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 1 now requires the following: PNG media_image1.png 208 598 media_image1.png Greyscale At the instant, the limitation is indefinite, since the gripping member is actually part of the emergency opening device. It appears that the intention is to claim that the emergency opening device includes a gripping member as claimed. Therefore, in order to continue with the examination, the claim will be interpreted as the emergency opening device including a gripping member. Correction is required. Claim 1 also requires that the gripping member is out of the cavity in a rest position. The limitation is indefinite since before, the claim requires that the emergency opening device is accessible from inside the cavity. If that is the case, then how in a rest position is out of the cavity? Therefore, in order to continue with the examination, a broad interpretation will be given. Correction is required. Claim 5 requires that the gripping member is, in a resting position, placed into a cylinder, and that this cylinder forms the button. At the instant, it is unclear how this is possible. If the gripping member is placed into the cylinder, how does the user only push the cylinder and how after pushing, it will expose the gripping member? It appears that the intention is to claim that the button is a portion of the gripping element and when in the rest position, the gripping element is position in a cylinder and that the button, which is a portion of the gripping element, is exposed so that the user can actuate on it. Therefore, in order to continue with the examination, a broad interpretation will be given. Correction is required. 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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat Application Publication No 20190234121 to Pudney et al (Pudney) in view of WO 2021239572 to Bajul et al (Bajul) and EP 2093357 (EP 357). PNG media_image2.png 563 732 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claims 1, 6 and 10, Pudney discloses a vehicle handle assembly (1) that comprises a housing (4) that sits flush against an outer panel of the vehicle and defining a cavity inside an opening element of the vehicle; an actuation switch (6), generating an electrical signal to be sent to a vehicle opening element controller (not shown) to release the vehicle opening element, and an emergency opening device (11) accessible from the inside of the cavity, the emergency opening device being configured to release mechanically the opening element allowing to open the opening element. First, Pudney fails to disclose that the emergency opening device comprises a gripping member that is has a portion extending out into the cavity. PNG media_image3.png 590 651 media_image3.png Greyscale Bajul teaches that it is well known in the art to provide an emergency opening device comprises a gripping member (3) that is has a portion (6) extending out to be operated by the user. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the emergency opening device described by Pudney as one that comprises a gripping member, as taught by Bajul in order to provide a device that can be operated at any time since it will not require an external element to operate it (key) that can be damaged or lost. Second, Pudney discloses that the emergency opening device is attached to a bracket (end wall of the housing 4). However, Pudney fails to disclose reversible attachment means to attach the device to the bracket. PNG media_image4.png 381 641 media_image4.png Greyscale EP 357 teaches that it is well known in the art to provide two part (46 and 48) on an assembly (44) that are secured to each other by means of a reversible attachment means (50, 52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the emergency opening device described by Pudney attached to the bracket of the housing by means of a reversible attachment means, as taught by EP 357, in order to be able to connect and disconnect the device at any time. As to claim 2, Pudney, as modified by Bajul, teaches that the gripping member (Bajul 3) is linked to a cable (Bajul 4), the cable being connected to an opening element latch mechanism, causing mechanical actuation of the opening element latch mechanism (Bajul through 5). As to claim 3, Pudney, as modified by Bajul, teaches that the gripping member (Bajul 3) is accessible by a through opening made in the housing (Pudney). As to claim 4, Pudney, as modified by Bajul, teaches that a removable button (Bajul 6) is located into the through opening, the gripping member being accessible by pushing the button. As to claim 5, Pudney, as modified by Bajul, teaches that the button (Bajul 6) is a portion of the gripping element and when in the rest position, the gripping element (Bajul 3) is position in a cylinder (Bajul 2) and that the button is exposed so that the user can actuate on it. As to claim 7, Pudney discloses that the actuation switch (6) is a mechanical or an electrical actuation switch. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat Application Publication No 20190234121 to Pudney et al (Pudney) in view of WO 2021239572 to Bajul et al (Bajul), EP 2093357 (EP 357) and further in view of US Pat No 6,435,574 to Taga et al (Taga). Pudney, as modified by Bajul and EP 357, fails to disclose that the actuation switch comprises at least one reinforcing bar. PNG media_image5.png 706 569 media_image5.png Greyscale Taga teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a switch (33) that is configured to be mounted on a reinforcing bar (15) in order to provide a reinforcing surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the actuation switch described by Pudney, as modified by Bajul and EP 357, with a reinforcing bar, as taught by Patterson, in order to provide a mounting structure for the switch and add reinforcement to the switch. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat Application Publication No 20190234121 to Pudney et al (Pudney) in view of WO 2021239572 to Bajul et al (Bajul), EP 2093357 (EP 357) and further in view of US Pat Application Publication No 20210087861 to Marcolino et al (Marcolino). Pudney, as modified by Bajul and EP 357, fails to disclose that the actuation switch comprises an NFC reader and/or a RFID reader. Marcolino teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a sensing unit (350) with a RFID or NFC reader (par 48) in order to enhance communication with the sensor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the actuation switch described by Pudney, as modified by Bajul and EP 357, with an NFC or RFID reader, as taught by Marcolini, in order to enhance communication with the sensor. Response to Arguments With respect to the drawing objection and 112 2nd paragraph rejection to claim 5, the applicant argues that instead of a push-push button made by the gripping member itself, it is possible to arrange the gripping member in a hollow cylinder (which may be closed at one end forming the button) and it is the hollow cylinder which may be ejected by pushing on it. There is no support for all that in the specification and in the drawings. Here is the specification: PNG media_image6.png 62 623 media_image6.png Greyscale So, where all the stuff that the applicant argues is disclosed or illustrated. No one having ordinary skill in the art would come up with all the mentioned points that the applicant is arguing. Therefore, the rejection is maintained. The drawing objection is provisionally withdrawn. Also, in view of the current amendment, a new claim objection and 112 2nd paragraph rejection has been made on the record. As to the prior art rejection, applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Prosecution has been closed. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CARLOS LUGO whose telephone number is (571)272-7058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6pm. 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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571)272-7376. 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. /Carlos Lugo/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3675 January 24, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 19, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 04, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601209
FLUSH HANDLE ASSEMBLY FOR A VEHICLE DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598713
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPENING A RECEIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595692
AUTO FLUSH DOOR HANDLE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584330
LATCH ASSEMBLY WITH REMOVABLE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578054
Double Door Retainer
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+14.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1243 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