Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/711,158

HYDRAULIC PRESSURE CONTROL UNIT AND VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 17, 2024
Examiner
STAUBACH, CARL C
Art Unit
3747
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Robert Bosch GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
411 granted / 565 resolved
+2.7% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
592
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
44.2%
+4.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
23.7%
-16.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 565 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Drawings New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121 (d) are required in this application because Figure 4 shows only generic flow charts with no information presented in each element of the chart. Applicants' invention is unclear from the drawings because a number of methods may fit the same flow diagram. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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. Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by McGrath et al US 5,785,393. In Re 1-8, McGrath teaches 1. A hydraulic pressure control unit (250 fig 4 col 19 embodiment of 11 fig 1) that controls a pressure of brake fluid of a braking device (20 fig 4) configured to brake a vehicle (vehicle figs 1,4), comprising: a control device (the circuit(s) of figs 2,3A,3B, i.e. the circuit board as diagrammed figs 3a,3b) that is configured to control the pressure; and a connector (there are multiple connectors to and from 11/250 notably jack 163 to remote switch 250, item 27 into 11, item 12 into 11, see figs 2,3a,3b) that is connected to an in-vehicle network (construed as the wires of the circuit board of 11 and additionally wires 56,57 that communicate between connector 31, controller and brakes, e.g. unlabeled wires from 31 to 250, wires 12,60, especially 251 fig 4, and other wires 96,97,etc), wherein the control device includes a mode switching part (95 sleep mode circuit) that is configured to switch a mode between an operation mode (“automatic mode”) and a sleep mode (“sleep mode”) (col 4 ll 50-63), the operation mode is a mode in which control on the pressure is executed (automatic mode executes hydraulic brake control), the sleep mode is a mode in which power consumption is suppressed as compared to that in the operation mode (col 7 l 63 – col 8 l 17), the connector includes a terminal (jack 164 with wires 56,57 figs 2,3a,3b) that accepts input of a control signal used for the control on the pressure (remote switch 31 controls brakes as does brake pedal 21 to 22 to 27 to 26 into controller 11, also 71 as control input col 6 l 55 – col 7 l 3), and the mode switching part (95) has such a configuration as to switch the mode from the sleep mode to the operation mode once a signal is input to the terminal (57 and or 71,72,80,46,47 ) during the sleep mode (“Upon operation of the towing vehicle brakes or the gain control push-button 32, the microprocessor 45 causes the sleep mode circuit 95 to restore power to the deenergized portions of the controller 11.” Col 8 ll 14-17)(at least all figs and cols)(examiner notes items 74,70,85,52,49,45,95,63,59,62,66 all contain semiconductor components not limited to at least, microprocessor, transistor, Zener diodes, diodes, operational amplifier known as an op amp, MOSFT metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor, ADC 08032CIN A/D convertor and integrated circuit which is a microchip, items 103,142,171,110,224184,192,196,197. Items containing these structures 103,142,171,110,224184,192,196,197 are known in the art to person having ordinary skill in the art at time of inventive filing (PHOSITA) as electronic controllers). 2. The hydraulic pressure control unit according to claim 1, wherein the signal to be input to the terminal during the sleep mode is a signal of a prescribed pattern (96 comes from regulated power supply into 95 sleep mode circuit. 96 is regulated to a prescribed pattern of 5V, five volts, with input filtered per col 9 ll 5-40 with LM 2931). 3. The hydraulic pressure control unit according to claim 1, wherein the signal to be input to the terminal during the sleep mode is the control signal (72 and or 80 are control signals for braking input into microprocessor 45 which controls sleep mode circuit via 97,98). 4. The hydraulic pressure control unit according to claim 1, wherein the signal to be input to the terminal during the sleep mode is a control signal for a different control device (at least 31 remote manual control switch which in input to A/D convertor and output to micro processor via 46,47). 5. The hydraulic pressure control unit according to claim 2, wherein the signal to be input to the terminal during the sleep mode is a signal having a plurality of pulses (a control signal wakes the sleep circuit, control signals includes a “pulse train” see col 18 ll 23-40, a train being a plurality of pulses). 6. The hydraulic pressure control unit according to claim 1, wherein the mode switching part has such a configuration as to switch the mode from the operation mode to the sleep mode if the control signal used for the control on the pressure is not input for a prescribed period of time during the operation mode (“The sleep mode circuit 95 is actuated after a predetermined time has elapsed following the last brake application.” Col 8 ll 4-6). 7. The hydraulic pressure control unit according to claim 1, wherein the mode switching part has such a configuration as to switch the mode from the operation mode to the sleep mode if a signal of a prescribed pattern is input during the operation mode (The sleep mode circuit input control signal inherently has a prescribed pattern of 5V col 9 ll 5-40 via items 97,98 per Col 8 ll 1-4 and ). 8. A vehicle (figs 1,4 “vehicle”) comprising the hydraulic pressure control unit according to claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. 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) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McGrath et al US 5,785,393 in view of Masuda et al US 2021/0339824. In Re 9, McGrath teaches the vehicle according to claim 8. McGrath does not teach however Masuda teaches the vehicle (VH abstract fig 1) is a straddle- type vehicle. Masuda further teaches vehicle is human powered, abstract. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ) to replace McGrath’s fossil fueled engine powered vehicle with Masuda’s human powered straddle type vehicle to eliminate dependence on fossil fuel for personal transport. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL C STAUBACH whose telephone number is (571)272-3748. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 AM to 5:00 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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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. /CARL C STAUBACH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 17, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595769
VARIABLE VALVE ACTUATION CONTROLS FOR ENGINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583514
FOUR-WHEEL STEERING CONTROL DEVICE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570250
METHOD FOR DETERMINING AN OPTIMUM OR MAXIMUM-PERMISSIBLE SPEED OF A RAIL VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570324
COMPUTER SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING A PLURALITY OF FUNCTIONS FOR A DEVICE, IN PARTICULAR FOR A VEHICLE, BY SEPARATION OF A PLURALITY OF ZONES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12552353
System and Method for Controlling a Vehicle Parking Brake
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+21.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 565 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