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 8/12/25.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7-10, and 12-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat No 9,957,736 to Taurasi et al (Taurasi) in view of US Pat No 6,232,684 to Haag et al (Haag) and US Pat No 7,207,187 to Funahashi et al (Funahashi).
PNG
media_image1.png
686
1351
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Taurasi discloses a motor vehicle lock that comprises a locking mechanism (22) provided with a mechanical lock component (16).
A drive arrangement configured to drive the mechanical lock component.
A control unit (24) configured to actuate the drive arrangement and including a planar control board (34) that defines a board plane.
An energy storage arrangement (40) disposed in or on the lock housing and configured to provide electric voltage supply to the motorized drive arrangement and/or the control unit.
A lock housing provided with an inner housing part (where 22 is placed) configured to receive the locking mechanism and the drive arrangement, a housing cover (30) closing an upper side of the inner housing part and a control housing part (32) that receives the planar control board and the energy storage arrangement disposed between the inner housing part and the housing cover.
The control housing part (32) defines a dividing wall that defines an upper and a lower side of the control housing part. The control board and the energy storage arrangement are arranged on the upper side and the drive arrangement is arranged on the lower side.
Taurasi fails to disclose a lead frame that includes lead frame lines that are part of a frame along the board plane; wherein the lead frame has a connecting piece and end connecting tongues projecting from the dividing wall in opposite directions from the wall.
Taurasi shows that the motor vehicle lock comprises lead lines (48) that electrically connect the drive arrangement to the control board, wherein the line projects from opposite sides of the dividing wall to connect a control board and the drive arrangement.
PNG
media_image2.png
1203
1465
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Haag teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a lead frame (62) to electrically connect a drive arrangement (34) to a control board (84). The lead frame is located along “a board plane” of the control board.
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 lead lines described by Taurasi as part of a frame structure, as taught by Hang, in order to provide a supporting structure for the lines.
PNG
media_image3.png
774
1105
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Funahashi teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a lead frame (308) that is mounted related to a printed control board (309) along a board plane.
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 lead frame along a board plane, as taught by Funahashi, in order to mount the elements in a compacted way.
As to claim 2, Taurasi fails to disclose that the energy storage arrangement is electrically connected to the control board via the lead frame lines. Taurasi illustrates that the energy storage arrangement (40) is electrically connected to the control board.
Haag teaches that the energy storage arrangement (52) is electrically connected to the control board (84) by means of lead lines (76) of the lead frame.
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 electrically connect the energy storage arrangement described by Taurasi with the lead lines, as taught by Haag, in order to electrically connect any desired element to the board.
As to claim 4, Taurasi, as modified by Haag and Funahashi, teaches that the electric connection between the drive arrangement and the lead frame, an electric connection between the control board and the lead frame, and/or an electric connection between the energy storage arrangement and the lead frame are/is formed by a plug-in connection.
As to claim 7, Haag teaches that at least part of the end-side connector tongue is a connector pin, a resilient connector element, a resilient connector socket, and/or an insulation displacement connector.
As to claims 8 and 9, Haag and Funahashi teaches that the lead frame has different ends connecting different members of the device. Taurasi, as modified by Haag and Funahashi, teaches that the lead frame is capable of being electrically connect to the energy storage arrangement in a first direction from the dividing wall and electrically connect to the drive arrangement in an opposite direction from the dividing wall.
As to claim 10, Taurasi illustrates that the inner housing part (where 22 is placed) in conjunction with the housing cover (30) completely enclose the control housing part (32) and form a sealed connection.
As to claim 12, Taurasi illustrates that the housing cover (30) in conjunction with the control housing part (32) forms at least one closed chamber that receives the energy storage arrangement and/or the control board.
As to claim 13, Taurasi discloses that the motor vehicle lock further comprises an electric plug arrangement (20, 42) disposed on the control housing part and/or the control board wherein the electric plug arrangement is accessible through at least one recess defined by the housing cover.
As to claims 14-18, Taurasi, as modified by Haag and Funahashi, will teach a method of producing the motor vehicle lock as claimed.
As to claim 19, Taurasi, as modified by Haag and Funahashi, teaches that at least a portion of the lead frame is embedded in the dividing wall.
Claims 3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat No 9,957,736 to Taurasi et al (Taurasi) in view of US Pat No 6,232,684 to Haag et al (Haag), US Pat No 7,207,187 to Funahashi et al (Funahashi) and further in view of US Pat No 6,580,355 to Milo.
As to claim 3, Taurasi, as modified by Haag and Funahashi, fails to disclose that the energy storage arrangement is positioned laterally offset with respect to the control board.
PNG
media_image4.png
932
1269
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Milo teaches that it is well known in the art to provide an energy storage arrangement (100) that is positioned laterally offset with respect to a control board (380).
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 energy storage arrangement/control board described by Taurasi, as modified by Haag and Funahashi, positioned laterally offset with respect to each other, as taught by Milo, in order to mount the elements in a desired way.
As to claim 11, Milo also teaches that the control housing (32) includes a 1st housing section that the energy storage arrangement, and a second housing section, separate from the first housing section, that receives the control board, wherein the first and second housing sections are separated from one another by a sidewall.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the previous 112 rejection, the current amendment overcomes the previous issues.
With respect to the prior art rejection, the applicant argues that the prior art fails to disclose that the end side connector tongues of at least one of the lead frame lines projects in opposite directions from the dividing wall.
As previously mentioned during prosecution of the parent case, Taurasi discloses that the control board and the energy storage arrangement are arranged on the upper side and the drive arrangement is arranged on the lower side of the dividing wall. Taurasi just disclose a lead line connecting the circuit board and the drive arrangement.
Haag and Funahashi teaches that the lead frame has different ends connecting different members of the device.
Taurasi in combination with the teachings of Haag and Funahashi, will present a lead frame with end tongues projecting from opposite sides of the dividing wall, in order to connect the devices at opposite sides of the dividing wall to the printed board. That will provide ends of the lead frame extending in opposite directions.
Therefore, as previously mentioned now and during prosecution of the parent case, the rejection is maintained.
Since the examiner will maintain this position, in order to expedite prosecution, applicant can file an appeal brief as his next response to allow the Board of Appeals to decide.
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
October 6, 2025