Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/589,984

Grounding Brush Assembly

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Feb 28, 2024
Examiner
VO, ETHAN NGUYEN
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Aktiebolaget SKF
OA Round
2 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
25 granted / 36 resolved
+1.4% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
69
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
62.2%
+22.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
§112
11.3%
-28.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 36 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 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. 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. Claims 1-7 and 9- 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Arnault (US 2022/0294319) and in view of Hubert (US 20210021180). As to claim 1, Arnault discloses a brush assembly (Fig. 3) comprising: a brush including a support and a plurality of conductive fibers fitted within the support (Fig. 3); and a brush fitting plate connected with the support of the brush and including a radial portion supported axially against the support of the brush (Fig. 3 and 4), a plurality of retention tongues configured to axially retain the support and an annular axial centering portion configured to radially center the support of the brush and extending from the radial portion (Fig. 4), the axial centering portion of the fitting plate being supported radially against the support of the brush and the retention tongues extending from the axial centering portion (Fig. 3 and 4). PNG media_image1.png 387 400 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 462 282 media_image2.png Greyscale Arnault fails to disclose a grounding brush assembly, an annular axial centering portion configured extending continuously around the entire perimeter of the support of the brush, and the axial centering portion of the fitting plate radially surrounding the support. Hubert, however, discloses a grounding brush assembly (Para 0023), an annular axial centering portion configured extending continuously around the entire perimeter of the support of the brush, and the axial centering portion of the fitting plate radially surrounding the support (Fig. 3 and 4). PNG media_image3.png 557 398 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 337 357 media_image4.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the assembly of Arnault with a grounding brush assembly, an annular axial centering portion configured extending continuously around the entire perimeter of the support of the brush, and the axial centering portion of the fitting plate radially surrounding the support, as disclosed by Hubert, in order to better secure the support. As to claim 2, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of retention tongues extend axially from a side of the annular axial centering portion opposite to the radial portion (Fig. 4 of Arnault). PNG media_image5.png 476 344 media_image5.png Greyscale As to claim 3, the combination of Arnault and Hubert disclose the assembly according to claim 1, wherein the support of the brush includes a fitting portion and two lateral flanks extending radially inwardly from the fitting portion and axially enclosing the conductive fibers (Fig. 4 of Arnault), the radial portion of the fitting plate being supported axially against one of the lateral flanks of the support and the annular axial centering portion being supported radially against the fitting portion of the support (Fig. 4 of Arnault). PNG media_image6.png 525 301 media_image6.png Greyscale As to claim 4, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 3, wherein each one of the plurality of retention tongues includes an axial portion supported radially against the fitting portion of the support of the brush (Fig. 4 of Arnault) and a radial portion extending radially inwardly from the axial portion and axially contacting the support (Fig. 4 of Arnault). PNG media_image7.png 469 336 media_image7.png Greyscale As to claim 5, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of retention tongues are circumferentially spaced apart (Fig. 3 of Arnault). PNG media_image8.png 472 478 media_image8.png Greyscale As to claim 6, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 1, wherein the fitting plate further includes a fitting portion which is offset radially outwardly with respect to the annular axial centering portion and with respect to the retention tongues (Fig. 3 of Arnault), the fitting portion having an outer surface defining the outer diameter of the fitting plate (Fig. 3 of Arnault). PNG media_image9.png 492 571 media_image9.png Greyscale As to claim 7, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 6, wherein the fitting portion of the fitting plate includes an annular flange (Fig. 2 of Arnault). PNG media_image10.png 397 319 media_image10.png Greyscale As to claim 9, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 6, wherein the fitting plate further includes at least one connection portion extending from the annular axial centering portion and connected to the fitting portion (Fig. 2 and 4 of Arnault). PNG media_image11.png 453 634 media_image11.png Greyscale As to claim 10, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 9, wherein the connection portion of the fitting plate is disposed on one axial side of the support of the brush and the radial portion of the fitting plate is disposed on an opposing axial side of the support of the brush (Fig. 4 of Arnault). PNG media_image12.png 528 339 media_image12.png Greyscale As to claim 11, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses an electric motor (Para 0003 of Arnault) comprising: a housing (Para 0003 of Arnault); a shaft (Para 003 of Arnault); and at least one grounding brush assembly according to claim 1, the grounding brush assembly being fitted radially between the housing and the shaft (Fig. 1, Para 0039 of Arnault), the conductive fibers of the brush of the assembly being in contact with the shaft (Fig. 1 of Arnault). PNG media_image13.png 368 411 media_image13.png Greyscale As to claim 12, Arnault discloses a brush assembly comprising: a grounding brush including a support and a plurality of conductive fibers fitted within the support (Fig. 3); and a brush fitting plate connected with the support of the brush and including a radial portion supported axially against the support of the brush (Fig. 3 and 4), a plurality of retention tongues configured to axially retain the support (Fig. 4), an annular axial centering portion configured to radially center the support of the brush and extending from the radial portion (Fig. 4), the axial centering portion of the fitting plate being supported radially against the support of the brush and the retention tongues extending from the axial centering portion (Fig. 3 and 4), an annular fitting portion for fitting and centering the fitting plate within a bore of a housing (Fig. 3), the annular fitting portion being offset radially outwardly with respect to and radially surrounding the annular axial centering portion and the retention tongues and having an outer surface defining the outer diameter of the fitting plate (Fig. 3), and at least one radial connection portion extending radially outwardly from an axial side of the annular axial centering portion opposite to the radial portion of the fitting plate and connected to the fitting portion (Fig. 2). PNG media_image14.png 431 328 media_image14.png Greyscale PNG media_image1.png 387 400 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 462 282 media_image2.png Greyscale Arnault fails to discloses a grounding brush assembly. Hubert, however, discloses a grounding brush assembly (Para 0023). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the assembly of Arnault with a grounding brush assembly, as disclosed by Hubert, in order to provide a return path for faulty currents. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Arnault, Hubert, and in view of Leisinger (US 2021/0234436). As to claim 8, the combination of Arnault and Hubert discloses the assembly according to claim 6, wherein the fitting portion of the fitting plate includes a flange and a circumferential direction (Fig. 2 of Arnault). PNG media_image15.png 434 321 media_image15.png Greyscale Arnault fails to disclose a plurality of fitting lugs. Leisinger, however, discloses a plurality of fitting lugs (Para 0023). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the assembly of Arnault with a plurality of fitting lugs, as disclosed by Leisinger, to properly secure the plate. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ETHAN N VO whose telephone number is (571)270-7593. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am - 5pm. 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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached on 571 272 3560. 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. /ETHAN NGUYEN VO/ Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 28, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 18, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 09, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603538
ROTATING ELECTRIC MACHINE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592597
SELECTIVE PERMEABILITY ROTOR STRUCTURE FOR INTERIOR PERMANENT MAGNET MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587059
Electric Motor Coolant Frame and Header
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580446
ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580501
VIBRATION WAVE RADIATING DEVICE
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
69%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+23.2%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 36 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