Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/733,203

AUTONOMOUS UNIVERSAL WHEELCHAIR SECUREMENT DEVICE FOR WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 04, 2024
Examiner
HORNER, MINATO LEE
Art Unit
3665
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
The Braun Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
8 granted / 10 resolved
+28.0% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
50
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.8%
-27.2% vs TC avg
§103
50.7%
+10.7% vs TC avg
§102
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 10 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 . Status of Claims This communication is in response to application No. 18/733,203, filed on 06/04/2024. Claims 1-19 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1-19 have been rejected as follows. Priority Applicant' s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 09/10/2024 has been acknowledged. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because the reference numbers in the drawings do not match with the reference numbers in the specification. For example, top chassis 104 is described as top chassis 14 in the specification, bottom chassis 102 is described as bottom chassis 12. Due to this issue, many of the reference numbers in the drawings cannot be found in the specification, and vice versa. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because “Further, A method for securing a wheelchair” should be changed to “Further, a method for securing a wheelchair”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: There are no periods throughout the specification, making it difficult to read. The reference numbers in the specification do not match the reference numbers in the drawings. In par. 13 and 66, Fig. 1 should be Fig. 10 In par. 71, "a third mode in which wheelchair 32 is occupied and/or otherwise fitter" should be "a third mode in which wheelchair 32 is occupied and/or otherwise fitted" In par. 69 , "At 114, the user (eg, wheelchair occupant, rider, etc who uses app 8 or avails the ride-sharing services managed by fleet management system 98) may be promoted for wheelchair settings" should be "At 114, the user (eg, wheelchair occupant, rider, etc who uses app 8 or avails the ride-sharing services managed by fleet management system 98) may be prompted for wheelchair settings" Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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) 1-12 and 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Brahic (US 20230110338 A1), hereinafter ’338. Regarding claim 1, ‘338 teaches a wheelchair securement system (Fig. 1, AUWR 100) for a vehicle (Fig. 6, AV 602) comprising: a latch configured to grasp an axle of a wheelchair (Fig. 1, latch 112); actuators operatively coupled to the latch (par. 33, "actuators 120 (not shown) may control movements of top chassis 104, arm 108 and latch 112"); and a controller configured to generate control signals that control movement of the actuators to place the latch in an operative position before the wheelchair enters the vehicle (par. 40, "a controller (not shown) which directs actuators 120 using any suitable means, for example, through electrical control signals...AUWR 100 may be actuated by the controller and moved into the appropriate position for the particular wheelchair before the wheelchair occupant enters the AV"), the operative position comprising a location where the axle of the wheelchair can be grasped securely (par. 76, "The operative position comprises positioning the latch at a location where the axle of the wheelchair can be grasped securely."). Regarding claim 2, ‘338 teaches the wheelchair securement system of claim 1, further comprising a remote control in communication with the controller, wherein operations on the remote control provide instructions to the controller for generating the control signals (par. 40, " The remote control may be coupled to the controller, which then directs actuators 120 accordingly"). Regarding claim 3, ‘338 teaches wheelchair securement system of claim 1, further comprising an application software executing in an electronic device, wherein the application software provides instructions to the controller for generating the control signals (par. 80, "an application software executing in an electronic device, in which the application software provides instructions to the controller for selecting between the three selections."). Regarding claim 4, ‘338 teaches the wheelchair securement system of claim 1, wherein the latch is located at a front-facing rear passenger-side of the vehicle (Fig. 6, AUWR 100). Regarding claim 5, ‘338 teaches a wheelchair restraint (Fig. 6, AUWR 100) for a vehicle (Fig. 6, AV 602) comprising: a bottom chassis securely fastened to a floor of the vehicle (Fig. 1, bottom chassis 102); a top chassis configured to slide up and down relative to the bottom chassis (Fig. 1, top chassis 104); an arm configured to rotate around a pivot axis at a first end proximate to the top chassis (Fig. 1, arm 108); a latch configured to securely grasp an axle of a wheelchair, the latch being attached to a second end of the arm distant from the top chassis and configured to slide relative to the arm toward and away from the top chassis (Fig. 1, latch 112); a first actuator configured to slide the top chassis relative to the bottom chassis; a second actuator configured to rotate the arm around the pivot axis; and a third actuator configured to slide the latch relative to the arm (par. 33, "actuators 120 (not shown) may control movements of top chassis 104, arm 108 and latch 112"). Regarding claim 6, ‘338 teaches the wheelchair restraint of claim 5, wherein the latch comprises a horizontal clasp and a vertical clasp (Fig. 1, horizontal clasp 116 and vertical clasp 118) and the wheelchair restraint further comprises a fourth actuator configured to move the horizontal clasp and the vertical clasp to securely grasp the axle of the wheelchair (par. 83, "a fourth actuator configured to move the horizontal clasp and the vertical clasp to securely grasp the axle of the wheelchair"). Regarding claim 7, ‘338 teaches the wheelchair restraint of claim 5, wherein the first actuator, the second actuator, and the third actuator are controlled by a controller according to preset configuration settings of the wheelchair (par. 84, “the first actuator, the second actuator, and the third actuator are controlled by a controller according to preset configuration settings of the wheelchair.”). Regarding claim 8, ‘338 teaches the wheelchair restraint of claim 5, wherein the top chassis slides relative to the bottom chassis using a sliding mechanism comprising rails (par. 85, "the top chassis slides relative to the bottom chassis using a sliding mechanism comprising rails"). Regarding claim 9, ‘338 teaches the wheelchair restraint of claim 5, wherein the top chassis slides relative to the bottom chassis using a sliding mechanism comprising slots and pins (par. 86, "the top chassis slides relative to the bottom chassis using a sliding mechanism comprising slots and pins."). Regarding claim 10, ‘338 teaches a method for securing a wheelchair in a vehicle, the method comprising: receiving wheelchair settings of a wheelchair to be secured in a vehicle (par. 88, "the preset configuration settings are received from an onboard computer in the AV"); generating control signals according to the wheelchair settings (par. 68, "controller 902 may generate control signals according to the wheelchair settings accessed and retrieved from memory."); communicating the control signals to an actuator of a wheelchair restraint, wherein the actuator moves the wheelchair restraint to secure the wheelchair according to the control signals (par. 68, "controller 902 may communicate the control signals to actuators 120. At 1114, actuators 120 may move AUWR 100 (and unlock OWR 402 as needed) according to control signals received from controller 902."). Regarding claim 11, ‘338 teaches method of claim 10, further comprising prompting a user for the wheelchair settings (par. 67, " the user (e.g., wheelchair occupant, rider, etc. who uses app 800 or avails the ride-sharing services managed by fleet management system 908) may be [prompted] for wheelchair settings.”). Regarding claim 12, ‘338 teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the prompting is through an application software installed in an electronic device (par. 67, "In some embodiments, this prompting may be performed through the user interface of app 800."). Regarding claim 14, ‘338 teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising storing the wheelchair settings in a memory (par. 67, " the user input wheelchair settings may be stored in memory"). Regarding claim 15, ‘338 teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the memory is associated with a controller that generates the control signals based on the wheelchair settings stored in the memory (par. 68, "controller 902 may generate control signals according to the wheelchair settings accessed and retrieved from memory."). Regarding claim 16, ‘338 teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the memory is associated with an onboard computer in the vehicle (par. 67, "the memory storing the wheelchair settings may be located in onboard computer 910"), and the method further comprises communicating the wheelchair settings stored in the memory of the onboard computer to a controller that generates the control signals (par. 68, "controller 902 may generate control signals according to the wheelchair settings accessed and retrieved from memory."). Regarding claim 17, ‘338 teaches the method of claim 14, further comprising modifying the control signals according to updated instructions received from a remote control in the vehicle coupled to the controller (par. 68, "the user may update instructions using remote control 810"). Regarding claim 18, ‘338 teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the wheelchair restraint comprises: a bottom chassis securely fastened to a floor of the vehicle (Fig. 1, bottom chassis 102); a top chassis configured to slide up and down relative to the bottom chassis (Fig. 1, top chassis 104); an arm configured to rotate around a pivot axis at a first end proximate to the top chassis (Fig. 1, arm 108); a latch configured to securely grasp an axle of a wheelchair, the latch being attached to a second end of the arm distant from the top chassis and configured to slide relative to the arm toward and away from the top chassis (Fig. 1, latch 112). Regarding claim 19, ‘338 teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the actuator comprises: a first actuator configured to slide the top chassis relative to the bottom chassis; a second actuator configured to rotate the arm around the pivot axis; and a third actuator configured to slide the latch relative to the arm (par. 33, "actuators 120 (not shown) may control movements of top chassis 104, arm 108 and latch 112"). 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. 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. Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ’338 in view of Brahic, hereinafter ‘267. ‘338 teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the prompting is through a remote control coupled to a controller in the vehicle (par. 67, “In other embodiments, this prompting may be performed through other means”). ‘338 fails to explicitly teach the prompting is through a remote control coupled to a controller in the vehicle. However, ‘267 teaches the prompting is through a remote control coupled to a controller in the vehicle (claim 9, " the prompting is through a remote control coupled to a controller in the vehicle."). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘338 to incorporate the teachings of ‘267 in order to allow the passenger to secure a wheelchair to the vehicle regardless of the make and model (par. 18). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINATO LEE HORNER whose telephone number is (571)272-5425. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5. 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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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. /M.L.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 04, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593748
AUTONOMOUS MACHINE HAVING VISION SYSTEM FOR NAVIGATION AND METHOD OF USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12567332
METHOD OF COLLISION POINT CALCULATION AND EMERGENCY BRAKE ASSIST DECELERATION BASED ON THE METHOD OF COLLISION POINT CALCULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12545149
VR-BASED SEAT CONTROL APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12485815
PATTERN-BASED INTELLIGENT PERSONALIZED CHOREOGRAPHY FOR SOFTWARE-DEFINED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 4 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
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 10 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