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 .
The examiner acknowledges applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-9, 11, 12, and 14 filed April 6, 2026. Claims 3, 6, 10, and 13 are withdrawn.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In Paragraph 22, line 1, the phrase “an outer casing 25” should be changed to “an outer casing 35.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 7-9, 11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sato (US-5660081).
6. In regards to claim 1, Sato discloses a vehicle comprising: a vehicle door assembly (trunk lid considered as a vehicle door assembly because the lid is a barrier or panel of the vehicle that is moved such that entry is allowed or prevented to a compartment, i.e. the trunk, Col. 1, lines 8-12) comprising: a door interior handle assembly including a primary spring 57 that biases a door interior handle 17 toward a latched position (neutral, rest, or free position shown in Figure 12 in which the door interior handle has not actuated latch assembly T and discussed in Col. 9, lines 12-23); a door latch assembly T; at least one cable 5 and 6 operably connects the door interior handle to the door latch assembly; and a spring module 2 (Figure 12) operably connected to the door interior handle by the at least one cable such that the spring module provides a secondary biasing force (force of spring 62) that biases the door interior handle toward the latched position throughout any motion of the door interior handle away from the latched position (the force of spring 62 pulls on inner cable portion 5i connected to the door interior handle to tension the cable and therefore return the cable and the door interior handle to the free position, such that even when the door interior handle is pushed in the direction B, as opposed to being turned in direction A, once the force on the door interior handle is released, the spring 62 provides the pulling force on inner cable portion 5i such that the second biasing force is still applied to the door interior handle to ensure that the door interior handle is returned to the latched position or free position in which the inner cable portion 5i is tensioned and the connecting portion 17c of the door interior handle is urged against a lower surface of the movable end 57m of the primary spring 57, Col. 8, lines 65-67 and Col. 9, lines 12-23).
7. In regards to claim 2, Sato discloses that the at least one cable comprises a first cable 6 that extends between the spring module and the door latch assembly and a second cable 5 that extends between the spring module and the door interior handle.
8. In regards to claims 4 and 11, Sato discloses that the spring module comprises an outer casing 59 and a secondary spring 62 located in the casing that is configured to bias the at least one cable.
9. In regards to claims 7 and 14, Sato discloses that the secondary spring is a torsion spring (Figure 12).
10. In regards to claim 8, Sato discloses a method of controlling unlatching of a door latch assembly T of a vehicle door assembly (trunk lid and portion of the vehicle to which the support 59 is mounted, with the trunk lid considered as a vehicle door because the lid is a barrier or panel of the vehicle that is moved such that entry is allowed or prevented to a compartment, i.e. the trunk, Col. 1, lines 8-12), the method comprising: connecting a spring module 2 to at least one cable 5 and 6, the at least one cable operably connecting to a door interior handle assembly including a primary spring 57 that biases a door interior handle 17 toward a latched position (neutral or rest position shown in Figure 12 in which the door interior handle has not actuated latch assembly T), the spring module configured to provide a secondary biasing force (force of spring 62) that biases the door interior handle toward the latched position throughout any motion of the door interior handle away from the latched position (the force of spring 62 pulls on inner cable portion 5i connected to the door interior handle to tension the cable and therefore return the cable and the door interior handle to the free position, such that even when the door interior handle is pushed in the direction B, as opposed to being turned in direction A, once the force on the door interior handle is released, the spring 62 provides the pulling force on inner cable portion 5i such that the second biasing force is still applied to the door interior handle to ensure that the door interior handle is returned to the latched position or free position in which the inner cable portion 5i is tensioned and the connecting portion 17c of the door interior handle is urged against a lower surface of the movable end 57m of the primary spring 57, Col. 8, lines 65-67 and Col. 9, lines 12-23); and mounting the spring module inside the vehicle door assembly (Col. 8, lines 38-41).
11. In regards to claim 9, Sato discloses that the at least one cable comprises a first cable 5 that extends between the spring module and the door interior handle and a second cable 6 that extends between the spring module and the door latch assembly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Claim(s) 5 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US-5660081) in view of Brose (DE 202011002760 U1). Sato discloses the vehicle and method of claims 1 and 11 above, with the secondary spring configured to bias a rotatable element 33 located in the outer casing and coupled to the at least one cable (Figure 12), but fails to disclose that the rotatable element is a cable drum around which the at least one cable is wound. Bose teaches a cable drum 8 around which at least one cable 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is wound (Paragraph 13 of the Computer Generated Translation), with the cable drum providing a rotatable connection between a door interior handle 23 and a door latch assembly 24. 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 cable drum to connect to the at least one cable, with reasonable expectation of success, since the use of the cable drum would yield the predictable result of providing a rotatable element to which the at least one cable is connected and provide a means by which the door latch assembly can be actuated by the door interior handle.
Response to Arguments
15. Applicant's arguments filed April 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In light of applicant’s amendments to the claims, as is apparent from Sato, the spring 62 still provides the secondary biasing force to the door interior handle via tensioning of the inner cable portion 5i when the force on the door interior handle to cause the door interior handle to rotate in direction B is removed. The spring 62 biases the inner cable portion to tension after any force in direction A or B is applied, such that the door interior handle is returned back to its latched position or free state (Col. 8, lines 65-67 and Col. 9, lines 12-23), and therefore, the claim limitations are met.
16. In light of applicant’s amendments to Paragraph 19 of the specification, the corresponding objection to the specification set forth in the previous Office Action is withdrawn. The objection to Paragraph 22 of the specification has been maintained since the response filed April 6, 2026 did not include an amendment to Paragraph 22 as remarked by applicant in the remarks filed on April 6, 2026.
17. In light of applicant’s amendments to the claims, the claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the previous Office Action are withdrawn.
Conclusion
18. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
19. 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 June 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights