DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Status of Claims
This is the first Office Action on the merits for application no. 18/678,697 filed on May 30th, 2024. Claims 1-19 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on May 30th, 2024 and June 8th, 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements were considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the use of implied phraseology. Please remove “present disclosure” and “disclosed herein” from the abstract. Correction is required. See MPEP 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Regarding Claim 5 (line 3), please change the recitation of “an unextended state upon a brake release” to - - an unextended state upon [[a]] the brake release - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 1 (lines 7-8).
Regarding Claim 12 (line 3), please change the recitation of “an unextended state upon a brake release” to - - an unextended state upon [[a]] the brake release - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 9 (lines 8-9).
Regarding Claim 16 (line 3), please change the recitation of “first U-shaped and section U-shaped sections” to - - first U-shaped and [[section]] second U-shaped sections - - as this feature is previously referred to in claim 16 (line 2).
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 3-8 and 11-15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 3 (lines 2-3), in the recitation of “wherein the first end of the bias spring is coupled to the retention member” it is unclear if Applicant intended to redefine the first end of the bias spring as claim 1 (line 5) recites “a first end of the bias spring coupled to the caliper”. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the [[first]] second end of the bias spring is coupled to the retention member of the brake pad carrier” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination.
Regarding Claim 4 (lines 1-4), in the recitation of “wherein the bias spring has a spring body with a first section, a second section, and an intermediate section connecting the first and second sections, the first section being configured to engage the caliper, the second section being configured to engage the brake pad carrier” the difference between the “first end” and “second end” recited in claim 1 (lines 5-6) and the “first section” and “second section” recited in claim 4 (lines 1-4) is unclear. It is also unclear if Applicant intended to broaden the scope of claim 1. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the bias spring has a spring body with [[a]] the first [[section]] end, [[a]] the second [[section]] end, and an intermediate section connecting the first and second [[sections]] ends, the first end coupled to the caliper, the second end coupled to the brake pad carrier” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 6 (lines 1-3), in the recitations of “wherein the first section of the bias spring is bent to have a first axial extending section and a first lateral extending section and the second section of the bias spring” the difference between the “first end” and “second end” recited in claim 1 (lines 5-6) and the “first section” and “second section” recited in claim 6 (lines 1-4) is unclear. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the first [[section]] end of the bias spring is bent to have a first axial extending section and a first lateral extending section and the second [[section]] end of the bias spring” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 7, in the recitations of “wherein the first and second sections of the bias spring are bent” the difference between the “first end” and “second end” recited in claim 1 (lines 5-6) and the “first and second sections” recited in claim 7 is unclear. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the first and second [[sections]] ends of the bias spring are bent” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 7, the recited term “generally” in the recitation of “wherein the first and second sections of the bias spring are bent to each have a generally U-shape” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Applicant could recite “wherein the first and second [[sections]] ends of the bias spring are bent to each have a
Regarding Claim 8 (lines 2-3), in the recitations of “wherein the retention member comprises at least one aperture configured to receive an end of the second section of the bias spring” the difference between the “second end” recited in claim 1 (line 6) and the “end of the second section of the bias spring” recited in claim 8 is unclear. It is also unclear if Applicant intended to broaden the scope of claim 1. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the retention member comprises at least one aperture the second end of the bias spring” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 11 (lines 1-4), in the recitation of “wherein the bias spring has a spring body with a housing section, a carrier section, and an intermediate section connecting the housing and carrier sections, the housing section being configured to engage the housing, the carrier section being configured to engage the carrier” the difference between the “first end” and “second end” recited in claim 9 (lines 6-7) and the “carrier section” and “housing section” recited in claim 11 (lines 1-4) is unclear. It is also unclear if Applicant intended to broaden the scope of claim 9. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the bias spring has a spring body with the first end, the second end, and an intermediate section connecting the first and second ends, the second end engaged with the housing, the first end coupled with the carrier” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 13 (lines 1-3), in the recitations of “wherein the housing section of the bias spring is bent to have a first axial extending section and a first lateral extending section and the carrier section of the bias spring” the difference between the “first end” and “second end” recited in claim 9 (lines 6-7) and the “carrier section” and “housing section” recited in claim 13 (lines 1-3) is unclear. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the first end of the bias spring is bent to have a first axial extending section and a first lateral extending section and the second end of the bias spring” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 14, in the recitations of “wherein the housing and carrier sections of the bias spring are bent” the difference between the “first end” and “second end” recited in claim 9 (lines 6-7) and the “housing and carrier sections” recited in claim 14 is unclear. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the first and second ends of the bias spring are bent” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 14, the recited term “generally” in the recitation of “wherein the housing and carrier sections of the bias spring are bent to each have a generally U-shape” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Applicant could recite “wherein the first and second ends of the bias spring are bent to each have a
Regarding Claim 15 (lines 2-3), in the recitations of “wherein the retention member comprises an aperture configured to receive an end of the carrier section of the bias spring” the difference between the “first end” recited in claim 9 (line 6) and the “end of the carrier section of the bias spring” recited in claim 15 is unclear. It is also unclear if Applicant intended to broaden the scope of claim 9. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the retention member comprises an aperture the first end of the bias spring” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Claims 5-8 and 12-15 are rejected based upon their dependency to a rejected base claim.
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 1-5, 8-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 2009-0043185), in view of Kim (US 2022/0018406). Lee was cited on the IDS filed June 8th, 2026 and Kim was cited on the IDS filed May 30th, 2024. See translation provided by Applicant.
Regarding Claim 1, Lee teaches a vehicle disc brake apparatus (see Fig. 5) comprising:
a caliper (“caliper housing” 20);
a brake pad carrier (“carrier” 40) coupled to the caliper (20);
a guide rod (“guide rod” 50) extending between the caliper (20) and the brake pad carrier (40); and
a bias spring (“elastic protective cover” 56) surrounding the guide rod (50),
a first end (inboard end) of the bias spring (56) coupled to the caliper (20) and a second opposing end (outboard end) of the bias spring (56) coupled to the carrier (40).
Lee does not explicitly teach “wherein the bias spring is configured to generate a return force between the brake pad carrier and the caliper upon a brake release”. However, Lee does suggest “In FIG. 5, reference numeral 56 denotes an elastic protective cover”.
Kim teaches a bias spring (Figs. 1-5; “boot” 150) is configured to generate a return force between a brake pad carrier (“carrier” 120) and a caliper (“caliper housing” 130) upon a brake release ([0045] – “Referring to FIG. 5, when the guide rod 140 moves together with the caliper housing 130 during braking, a load distribution occurs on the elastic protrusion 154 as indicated by arrows F. Accordingly, a load is applied to the guide rod 140 in the direction of an arrow B by the reaction force generated on the elastic protrusion 154 when braking is released. That is, because the elastic protrusion 154 generates a reaction force depending on the movement of the guide rod 140 only during braking, the elastic protrusion 154 applies a load to the guide rod 140 in the opposite direction (arrow B) to the braking direction by an elastic restoring force according to the reaction force after the braking is released, so that a roll-back function of returning the caliper housing 130 moving together with the guide rod 140 to its original position is performed”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the bias spring taught by Lee with the return force taught by Kim, such that “wherein the bias spring is configured to generate a return force between the brake pad carrier and the caliper upon a brake release”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, and have the obvious advantage of returning the vehicle disc brake apparatus taught by Lee to its original position to prevent brake drag.
Regarding Claim 2, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 1,
Kim teaches wherein the bias spring (Figs. 1-5; 150) is a tension spring (see Fig. 5; see [0045] above).
Regarding Claim 3, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 1,
Lee teaches further comprising a retention member (Fig. 5, portion of 40 for receiving 56) provided on the brake pad carrier (40),
wherein the first end (inboard end) of the bias spring (56) is coupled to the retention member (40; see Fig. 5 of Lee; see 112(b) rejection above).
Regarding Claim 4, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 1,
Lee teaches wherein the bias spring (Fig. 5, 56) has a spring body with a first section (inboard end), a second section (outboard end), and an intermediate section connecting the first and second sections (inboard and outboard ends of 56; see Fig. 5 of Lee; see 112(b) rejection above),
the first section (inboard end of 56) being configured to engage the caliper (20),
the second section (outboard end of 56) being configured to engage the brake pad carrier (40), and the intermediate section extending circumferentially around the guide rod (50; see Fig. 5 of Lee; see 112(b) rejection above).
Regarding Claim 5, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 4,
Kim teaches wherein the intermediate section of the bias spring (Figs. 1-5, 150) is configured to be extended in an axial direction upon a brake action and configured to return to an unextended state upon a brake release, thereby generating the return force between the brake pad carrier (120) and the caliper (130; see Figs. 1-5 of kim; see [0045] above).
Regarding Claim 8, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 4,
Lee teaches further comprising a retention member (Fig. 5, portion of 40 for receiving 56) provided on the brake pad carrier (40),
wherein the retention member (40) comprises at least one aperture (see Fig. 5) configured to receive an end (outboard end) of the second section of the bias spring (56; see 112(b) rejection above), thereby securing the bias spring (56) to the retention member (40; see Fig. 5 of Lee).
Regarding Claim 9, Lee teaches a vehicle disc brake apparatus (see Fig. 5) comprising:
a housing (20);
a carrier (40);
a guide rod (50) extending between the carrier (40) and the housing (20);
a retention member (portion of 40 for receiving 56) provided on the carrier (40);
and a bias spring (56) surrounding the guide rod (50),
a first end (outboard end) of the bias spring (56) coupled to the retention member (40) and a second opposing end (inboard end) of the bias spring (56) engaged with the housing (20; see Fig. 5).
Lee does not explicitly teach “wherein the bias spring is configured to generate a return force between the carrier and the housing upon a brake release”. However, Lee does suggest “In FIG. 5, reference numeral 56 denotes an elastic protective cover”.
Kim teaches a bias spring (Figs. 1-5; 150) is configured to generate a return force between a brake pad carrier (120) and a caliper (130) upon a brake release (see [0045] above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the bias spring taught by Lee with the return force taught by Kim, such that “wherein the bias spring is configured to generate a return force between the carrier and the housing upon a brake release”, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized there was a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, and have the obvious advantage of returning the vehicle disc brake apparatus taught by Lee to its original position to prevent brake drag.
Regarding Claim 10, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 9,
Kim teaches wherein the bias spring (Figs. 1-5, 150) is a tension spring (see Fig. 5; see [0045] above).
Regarding Claim 11, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 9,
Lee teaches wherein the bias spring (Fig. 5, 56) has a spring body with a housing section (inboard end), a carrier section (outboard end), and an intermediate section connecting the housing and carrier sections (inboard and outboard ends of 56; see Fig. 5 of Lee; see 112(b) rejection above),
the housing section (inboard end of 56) being configured to engage the housing (20),
the carrier section (outboard end of 56) being configured to engage the carrier (40), and
the intermediate section extending circumferentially around the guide rod (50; see Fig. 5 of Lee; see 112(b) rejection above).
Regarding Claim 12, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 11,
Kim teaches wherein the intermediate section of the bias spring (Figs. 1-5, 150) is configured to be extended in an axial direction upon a brake action and configured to return to an unextended state upon a brake release, thereby generating the return force between the carrier (120) and the housing (130; see Fig. 5 of Kim; see [0045] above).
Regarding Claim 15, Lee and Kim teach the vehicle disc brake apparatus according to claim 11,
Lee teaches wherein the retention member (Fig. 5, portion of 40 for receiving 56) comprises an aperture (see Fig. 5) configured to receive an end (outboard end) of the carrier section of the bias spring (56), thereby securing the bias spring (56) to the retention member (40; see Fig. 5 of Lee; see 112(b) rejection above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims ---16-19 are allowed.
Claims 6-7 and 13-14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office Action and rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for allowance, if applicable, will be the subject of a separate communication to the Applicant or patent owner, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.104 and MPEP § 1302.14.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, Applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The prior art of Fischer (US 7,267,207), Becherer (US 10,377,396), Ruiz Busquets (US 5,749,445), KR 10-0694014 and KR 1999-027543 listed in the attached "Notice of References Cited" disclose similar disk brakes comprising guide rods surrounded by bias springs related to various aspects of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James J. Taylor II whose telephone number is (571)272-4074. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
JAMES J. TAYLOR II
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655
/JAMES J TAYLOR II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights