DETAILED ACTION
This final action is in response to the amendment filed on 29 August 2025.
Status of Claims
Claims 12-24 are pending.
Claim 12 was amended.
Claims 23 and 24 were added.
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 .
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 12, 14, 15, 18, 20-22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marcarini et al. (US 6588813 B1), herein referred to as Marcarini, in view of Suparschi (US 20010005082 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Marcarini discloses a handle module (see figs 1 & 3), comprising: a handle (5), a handle carrier (4) with at least one bearing point (at least the left portion of 4 as viewed in figs 1 & 2) for the movable mounting of the handle relative to the handle carrier and an electronic sensor unit (see fig 3) which has at least one movable sensor element (37) and a fixed sensor element (25), wherein the fixed sensor element is arranged opposite the movable sensor element (see fig 3), wherein the movable sensor element is arranged in the region of the bearing point between handle and handle carrier (see figs 2 & 3) in such a way that, in the event of an actuating force acting on the handle, the movable sensor element is shiftable or movable relative to the fixed sensor element (via 32 & 36; see col 3, lines 6-15).
Marcarini does not explicitly disclose the fixed sensor element being connected to a printed circuit board.
Suparschi, however, teaches that it is known in the art of vehicle door handles for a fixed sensor element (34) similar to that taught by Marcarini to be connected to a printed circuit board (32). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixed sensor element disclosed by Marcarini to be connected to a printed circuit board as taught by Suparschi at least because doing so would allow for a compact design of the electronic components of the door handle.
Regarding claim 14, Marcarini (in view of Suparschi) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein, in an unactuated position, the movable sensor element is held under prestress (via 40; see Marcarini fig 3).
Regarding claim 15, Marcarini (in view of Suparschi) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein, in an actuated position, the movable sensor element is relaxable in such a way that it moves away at least in some sections from the fixed sensor element (as 37 rotates counterclockwise from its position in Marcarini fig 3 [see col 3, lines 6-15], the section of 37 to the right of axis 38a as viewed in fig 3 moves away from 25).
Regarding claim 18, Marcarini (in view of Suparschi) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein, in an unactuated position, the movable sensor element and the fixed sensor element are aligned perpendicular to the handle in the region of the bearing point (see Marcarini fig 3; 37 and 25 are aligned perpendicular to at least portion 33 of the handle).
Regarding claim 20, Marcarini (in view of Suparschi) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein at least one bearing point comprises at least one carry-along element (Marcarini 30), which is pivotably mounted for a movement of the handle about a pivot point (at Marcarini 31) and has a contact surface (at Marcarini 32), which is operatively connected to the movable sensor element and, when the handle is actuated away from the handle carrier, releases the movable sensor element to move away from the fixed sensor element or applies a force to move same towards the fixed sensor element (see Marcarini fig 3 and col 3, lines 6-15).
Regarding claim 21, Marcarini (in view of Suparschi) discloses the handle module according to Claim 20, wherein the carry-along element is held under prestress in the direction of the movable sensor element (via Marcarini 35).
Regarding claim 22, Marcarini (in view of Suparschi) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein at least one bearing point comprises a lever mechanism with a lever (Marcarini 30), which is pivotably mounted for a movement of the handle about a pivot point (at Marcarini 31) and comprises a driver (Marcarini 32) which, when the handle is actuated away from the handle carrier (see Marcarini col 3, lines 6-15), carries along the movable sensor element (since Marcarini 40 maintains contact between 32 and 36) and moves or shifts same away from the fixed sensor element (note that at least the portion of Marcarini 37 to the right of 38a shifts away from the fixed sensor element).
Regarding claim 24, Marcarini (in view of Suparschi) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein the fixed sensor element is on the printed circuit board (per rejection of claim 12 above; see Suparschi fig 2).
Claims 12, 13, 16, 17, 19, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dualka (DE 102016123724 A1), in view of Van Wiemeersch et al. (US 20150330112 A1), herein referred to as Van Wiemeersch.
Regarding claim 12, Dualka discloses a handle module (see fig 1), comprising: a handle (14), a handle carrier (12) with at least one bearing point (at least at right end of 12 as viewed in fig 1) for the movable mounting of the handle relative to the handle carrier and an electronic sensor unit (see fig 3) which has at least one movable sensor element (portion of 35 which includes 44) and a fixed sensor element (portion of 35 which includes 46), wherein the fixed sensor element is arranged opposite the movable sensor element (see fig 3), wherein the movable sensor element is arranged in the region of the bearing point between handle and handle carrier in such a way that, in the event of an actuating force acting on the handle, the movable sensor element is shiftable or movable relative to the fixed sensor element (see figs 1-3).
Dualka does not explicitly disclose the fixed sensor element (or the movable sensor element) being connected to a printed circuit board.
Van Wiemeersch, however, teaches that it is known in the art of vehicle door handles for a fixed sensor element (e.g., 36A) similar to that taught by Dualka to be connected to a printed circuit board (e.g., 31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fixed sensor element disclosed by Dualka to be connected to a printed circuit board as taught by Van Wiemeersch at least because doing so would allow for a compact design of the electronic components of the door handle. Please note that the same analysis applies to modifying the movable sensor element of Dualka to be connected to the printed circuit board, either directly or indirectly.
Regarding claim 13, Dualka (in view of Van Wiemeersch) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein a distance and/or an angle between the movable sensor element and the fixed sensor element change/changes with a movement of the handle, and therefore a change in the measuring field is identifiable (compare Dualka figs 1 & 2).
Regarding claim 16, Dualka (in view of Van Wiemeersch) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein the movable sensor element is in the form of a spring sheet or a spring plate (note that 35 is considered a spring sheet since it is elastic and bends to allow movement; see Dualka fig 2).
Regarding claim 17, Dualka (in view of Van Wiemeersch) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein, in an unactuated position, the movable sensor element and the fixed sensor element are aligned parallel to the handle in the region of the bearing point (see Dualka fig 1).
Regarding claim 19, Dualka (in view of Van Wiemeersch) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein at least one bearing point comprises at least one bearing arm (right end of 12 as viewed in Dualka fig 1) which protrudes from a base (middle portion of 12 as viewed in Dualka fig 1) and on which the handle is held so as to be movably guided (compare Dualka figs 1 & 2), wherein one of the sensor elements is connected to a free end (i.e., upper end as viewed in Dualka fig 1) of the bearing arm and another of the sensor elements is connected to the handle, wherein, when the handle is actuated away from the bearing arm, a distance and/or an angle between the sensor elements increases (compare Dualka figs 1 & 2).
Regarding claim 23, Dualka (in view of Van Wiemeersch) discloses the handle module according to Claim 12, wherein the movable sensor element is connected to the printed circuit board (per rejection of claim 12).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) 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.
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 Christine M Mills whose telephone number is (571) 272-8322. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday - Thursday, 7:30 - 5:30 EST.
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, Joe Thomas, can be reached on (571) 272-8004. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675