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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 11, 2026 has been entered.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 7, and 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0350172) (will be referred to as Tamura et al. ‘172) in view of Tamura et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0106914) (will be referred to as Tamura et al. ‘914), and further in view of Louvel (US-7108301).
In regards to claim 1, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses a motor vehicle lock comprising: a locking mechanism including a rotary latch 10 and a pawl 11 positioned within a lock housing 14, an electric opening drive 23, 24 for operating the locking mechanism, the locking mechanism including a transmission element 17, an operating lever 12, wherein the transmission element is connected to the operating lever for a manual emergency opening of the locking mechanism (Figure 8), and an emergency actuation element (element 16 and section of component 15 in which element 16 is located, Figure 2) for the manual emergency opening of the locking mechanism, wherein the emergency actuation element is arranged outside the lock housing (Figures 2 and 9-11), and operates via the transmission element on the operating lever for the manual emergency opening, wherein the operating lever extends from an interior of the lock housing to an exterior of the lock housing (with at least a portion of the operating lever extending from the interior to the exterior, see Figure 8 below) through an opening in the lock housing (opening or space within the lock housing through which the operating lever moves from the position in Figure 6 to the position in Figure 8, see Figure 9 below, with the opening being open at least in a direction parallel to wall 51), wherein the emergency actuation element has an element housing (section of component 15 in which element 16 is located, Figure 2 including portions 51, 52, 53,, Figure 9) and a cover cap 16 movable relative to the element housing for actuating the transmission element.
Tamura et al. ‘172 fails to disclose that the cover cap includes an indicator that indicates an emergency actuation function to perform the manual emergency opening. Tamura et al. ‘914 teaches a motor vehicle lock having a cover cap 31 that includes an indicator (see Figure 2 below) that indicates an emergency function to perform a manual emergency opening (Paragraphs 25 and 39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include an indicator on the cover cap of Tamura et al. ‘172, with reasonable expectation of success, so as to provide an indication to a user of the function of the cover cap, thereby enhancing the usability and operation of the device.
Tamura et al. ‘172 fails to disclose that the emergency actuation element includes an electromotive drive for actuating the cover cap to move the cover cap relative to the element housing. Louvel teaches a cover cap 1 that is actuated to move relative to an element housing 4 by an electromotive drive 7. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include an electromotive drive to move the cover cap, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide an alternative motorized movement of the cover cap to the manual movement of the cover cap.
PNG
media_image1.png
925
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
731
615
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
853
715
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the cover cap has a manual manipulation element 41.
In regards to claim 3, Tamura et al. ‘914 teaches that the indicator of the cover cap is a visual indicator (Figure 2) that is an indication of the emergency actuation function.
In regards to claim 5, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the cover cap is pivotably connected to the element housing (Figure 11).
In regards to claim 6, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the cover cap is detachably latched to the element housing (detachably latched by components 54 and 55, Paragraphs 55 and 57).
In regards to claim 7, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the transmission element is detachably connected to the cover cap (end of the transmission element 17 is capable of being detached from the cover cap, Figure 5).
In regards to claim 9, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the operating lever is rotatably mounted inside of the lock housing (Figures 4 and 5).
In regards to claim 10, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the emergency actuation element is connected on an inside of a motor vehicle door (the trunk lid TL is considered as a rear motor vehicle door, Figure 1).
In regards to claim 11, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the manual manipulation element is a handle (considered as a handle because it can be grasped by a user, Figure 9).
In regards to claim 12, Tamura et al. ‘914 teaches that the visual indicator is a print marking (Figure 2).
In regards to claim 13, Tamura et al. ‘172 discloses that the transmission element is non-detachably connected to the cover cap (non-detachably connected because the device is located such that the transmission element is not easily detached, Figure 1).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0350172) (will be referred to as Tamura et al. ‘172) in view of Tamura et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0106914) (will be referred to as Tamura et al. ‘914), further in view of Louvel (US-7108301) as applied to claims 1-3, 6, 7, and 9-13 above, and further in view of De Marco (DE 29922605 U1). Tamura et al. ‘172 in view of Tamura et al. ‘914 fails to specify that that the indicator is a haptic indicator. De Marco teaches an actuating element or lever 1 that includes a haptic indicator (Paragraph 26 of the Computer Generated Translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to utilize a haptic indicator, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance a user’s ability to locate the cover cap (Paragraph 26 of the Computer Generated Translation) and since print indicators and haptic indicators are equivalent for their use in the indicator or indication art and the selection of any of these known equivalents to provide an indication to a user would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0350172) (will be referred to as Tamura et al. ‘172) in view of Tamura et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0106914) (will be referred to as Tamura et al. ‘914), further in view of Louvel (US-7108301) as applied to claims 1-3, 6, 7, and 9-13 above, and further in view of Zysk (US-8798858). Tamura et al. ‘172 in view of Tamura et al. ‘914 fails to specify that that the indicator is an acoustic indicator. Zysk teaches the use of an acoustic indicator (Col. 4, line 66 - Col. 5, line 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to utilize an acoustic indicator, with reasonable expectation of success, since acoustic indicators are known in the art for providing audible indications to a user and since print indicators and acoustic indicators are equivalent for their use in the indicator or indication art and the selection of any of these known equivalents to provide an indication to a user would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
In regards to applicant’s remarks concerning the amendments to claim 1, applicant is referred to the new rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 with newly cited Louvel (US-7108301) set forth in the current Office Action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSON MERLINO whose telephone number is (571)272-2219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7 AM to 3 PM.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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.
/ALYSON M MERLINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675 March 6, 2026