Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 18/607,582

CALIPER BRAKE

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Mar 18, 2024
Priority
Sep 27, 2023 — DE 102023209445.2
Examiner
TORRES WILLIAMS, MELANIE
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
HL Mando Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
660 granted / 780 resolved
+32.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
797
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
39.6%
-0.4% vs TC avg
§102
41.6%
+1.6% vs TC avg
§112
14.9%
-25.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 780 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION 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 § 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 (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 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 1-6 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lou et al. (US 2021/0348663 A1). Re claim 1, Lou et al. disclose a caliper brake (10) comprising: a brake disc ([0052]) configured to rotate together with a wheel; an inner brake pad (60) positioned to an inner side of the brake disc; an outer brake pad (62) positioned to an outer side of the brake disc; a first pressing member (24) configured to press the inner brake pad toward the brake disc; a housing including a finger portion (42) configured to press the outer brake pad toward the brake disc with a reaction force caused by a pressing force from the first pressing member; a second pressing member (24’) neighboring the first pressing member and configured to operate independently from the first pressing member to press the inner brake pad toward the brake disc; and a third pressing member (24’’) being opposite to the second pressing member with the brake disc interposed therebetween and configured to operate independently from the first pressing member to press the outer brake pad toward the brake disc wherein the housing includes a first cylinder (22) in which the first pressing member moves back and forth, a second cylinder (22’) in which the second pressing member moves back and forth, and a third cylinder (22”) in which the third pressing member moves back and forth. (Fig. 2) Re claim 2, Lou et al. disclose wherein the first pressing member (24) presses a larger area than the second pressing member (24’). See Fig. 2 including finger 42. Re claim 3, Lou et al. disclose wherein the first pressing member (24) presses a center portion of the inner brake pad (60). (Fig. 2) Re claim 4, Lou et al. disclose wherein the second pressing member (24’) is biased in one direction with respect to the first pressing member. (Fig. 4a) Re claim 5, Lou et al. disclose wherein the second pressing member (24’) presses a same area as the third pressing member (24”). Re claim 6, Lou et al. disclose wherein the second pressing member (24’) is coaxial with the third pressing member (24”). Re claim 8, Lou et al. disclose further comprising a controller (“ECU”) configured to control operations of the first pressing member, the second pressing member, and the third pressing member. ([0025]) Re claim 9, Lou et al. disclose wherein the inner brake pad (60) includes a first inner brake pad and a second inner brake pad that is separated from the first inner brake pad, and the outer brake pad (62) includes a first outer brake pad and a second outer brake pad that is separated from the first outer brake pad. (Fig. 2) Re claim 10, Lou et al. disclose wherein the first inner brake pad (left portion of 60) is pressed toward the brake disc by the first pressing member (24), and the second inner brake pad (right portion of 60) is pressed toward the brake disc by the second pressing member (24’). (Fig. 2) Re claim 11, Lou et al. disclose wherein the first outer brake pad (left portion of 62) is pressed toward the brake disc by the finger portion, and the second outer brake pad (right portion of 62) is pressed toward the brake disc by the third pressing member (25”). (Fig. 2) Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed July 17, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Lou et al. lacks “a housing including a finger portion configured to press the outer brake pad toward the brake disc with a reaction force caused by a pressing force from the first pressing member”. The housing 12 includes a “finger portion” 42 that is configured to press the outer pad 62 with a reaction force from the first pressing member 24. This is illustrated in Figure 2 and paragraph [0052]). Additionally, Applicant argues that Lou et al. does not disclose “a housing including a first cylinder (22) in which the first pressing member moves back and forth, a second cylinder (22’) in which the second pressing member moves back and forth, and a third cylinder (22”) in which the third pressing member moves back and forth.” Lou et al. clearly disclose a housing 12 including cylinders 22, 22’ and 22’’ for pressing members 24, 24’ and 24’’. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). It appears that Applicant is attacking the assembly of the individual components within the system. However, Applicant’s arguments are more specific than the claim language. Lou et al. teaches a brake assembly 10 which includes the limitations as claimed. 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 MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-7127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:00AM-3:00PM. 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. /MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3616 MTWAugust 19, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 18, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Jul 17, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 21, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747765
TEMPERATURE SENSOR AND DISC BRAKE HAVING THE SAME
3y 11m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12734854
HYDRO BUSHING
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12736099
DISC BRAKE DEVICE FOR RAILWAY VEHICLE
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729728
BRAKE LINING ARRANGEMENT FOR A VEHICLE DISC BRAKE
4y 2m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12722615
HYDRAULIC ADJUSTMENT UNIT, BRAKE SYSTEM, AND CONTROL METHOD
3y 9m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+11.8%)
2y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 780 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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