Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/760,118

AIR-GUIDING ELEMENT AND MOTOR VEHICLE COMPRISING AN AIR-GUIDING ELEMENT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 01, 2024
Priority
Aug 01, 2023 — DE 102023120399.1
Examiner
SACKINGER, GABRIEL RICHARD
Art Unit
4100
Tech Center
4100
Assignee
Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche Aktiengesellschaft
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allowance Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-60.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
Avg Prosecution
3 currently pending
Career history
3
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
71.4%
+31.4% vs TC avg
§102
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§112
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 0 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 6 line 24 the carrier element 6 is referred as the support element 6. This is inconsistent with the list of reference signs Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oxley (US Patent 9,802,657 B2) in view of Lee et al. (Korean Patent Application 20230065683 A). Regarding claim 1, Oxley discloses an air guiding element comprising: a longitudinally displaceable carrier element (Oxley Figure 9 Annotated); a surface element (Oxley Figure 9 Annotated) articulated to the carrier element in a movably mounted manner (Oxley Figure 22-23 Annotated shows the motion of the Surface Element. Per Oxley Col. 8 Lines 50-52, the Carrier Element’s orientation is constant, as depicted) with a … transmission (Oxley Figure 9 Annotated) that is configured to drive the carrier element in a longitudinally displaceable manner (Oxley Figure 22-23 Annotated). PNG media_image1.png 654 668 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 628 756 media_image2.png Greyscale However, Oxley fails to disclose a gearwheel transmission … wherein the gearwheel transmission comprises (i) a rack connected to the carrier element and (ii) a spur gear meshed with the rack. Lee et al. teaches a gearwheel transmission … wherein the gearwheel transmission comprises (i) a rack connected to the carrier element (Lee et al. Figure 12 Annotated) and (ii) a spur gear meshed with the rack (Lee et al. Figure 12 Annotated). PNG media_image3.png 463 649 media_image3.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the transmission of Oxley with the gearwheel transmission of Lee et al. that comprises a rack connected to the carrier element and a spur gear meshed with the rack. The transmission of Oxley is a well-known traveling nut linear actuator while the transmission of Lee et al. is a well-known rack and pinion system. Both of these systems are technologically mature and readily substitutable, so it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace a traveling nut linear actuator with a rack and pinion system to take advantage of a rack and pinion system’s generally faster actuation and thereby allow the surface element to deploy more quickly. Regarding claim 2, Oxley, as modified by Lee et al. discloses the air-guiding element according to claim 1, wherein the carrier element is mounted in a longitudinally displaceable manner in a side part or a rear part of a motor vehicle (Oxley Col. 1 Lines 14-17). Regarding claim 3, Oxley, as modified by Lee et al., discloses all of the claimed limitations except the air-guiding element according to claim 2, wherein the surface element is configured to move through an opening of the side part or the rear part. PNG media_image4.png 689 553 media_image4.png Greyscale Lee et al. further teaches the air-guiding element according to claim 2, wherein the surface element is configured to move through an opening of the side part or the rear part (Lee et al. Figures 1-2 Annotated). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the air guiding element of Oxley, as initially modified by Lee et al., and further modify it to be stored inside the vehicle when it is not in use, such that it is configured to move through an opening of the side part or rear part during deployment, as demonstrated by Lee et al. Since the surface of the area that stores the air guiding element is not very aerodynamic, stowing the air guiding element inside the vehicle improves aerodynamics since the surface of the area that stows the air guiding element is no longer in contact with the airflow. Regarding claim 4, Oxley as modified by Lee et al. discloses the air-guiding element according to claim 3, wherein the surface element is arranged to be displaceably guided relative to the carrier element by at least one slide track (Oxley Annotated Figure 22-23, the examiner takes displaceably to include linear motion, rotational motion or a combination of linear and rotational motion relative to the slide track. It is apparent that the surface element rotates relative to the carrier element). Regarding claim 5, Oxley as modified by Lee et al. discloses the air-guiding element according to claim 4, wherein at least one sliding block is connected to the surface element, wherein the at least one sliding block is arranged displaceably in the at least one slide track (Oxley Figure 15 Annotated). PNG media_image5.png 543 831 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claim 6, Oxley as modified by Lee et al. discloses the air-guiding element according to claim 5, wherein the surface element is arranged to be displaceable or pivotable relative to the carrier element and/or to the opening when the at least one sliding block is displaced in the slide track (Oxley Annotated Figure 22-23, the examiner takes displaceably to include linear motion, rotational motion or a combination of linear and rotational motion relative to the slide track. It is apparent that the surface element rotates relative to the carrier element. When the surface element is rotated, the sliding block present on the other side of the sliding track is displaced in the sliding track. The annotated presence of the sliding block in Oxley Annotated Figure 22-23 is confirmed by Oxley Figure 15 Annotated, which views the other side of the assembly in the position of Figure 22 of Oxley Annotated Figure 22-23). Regarding claim 7, Oxley as modified by Lee et al. discloses the air-guiding element according to claim 3, wherein the surface element is arranged to be displaceably guided relative to the carrier element by at least one slide track (Oxley Annotated Figure 22-23, the examiner takes displaceably to include linear motion, rotational motion or a combination of linear and rotational motion relative to the slide track. It is apparent that the surface element rotates relative to the carrier element). Regarding claim 8, Oxley as modified by Lee et al. discloses the air-guiding element according to claim 4, wherein at least one sliding block is connected to the surface element, wherein the at least one sliding block is arranged displaceably in the at least one slide track (Oxley Figure 15 Annotated). Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oxley (US Patent 9,802,657 B2) in view of Lee et al. (Korean Patent Application 20230065683 A) and further in view of Kishima (US Patent 9,868,478 B2). Regarding claim 9, Oxley, as modified by Lee et al., discloses all of the limitations except a plurality of the air-guiding elements. PNG media_image6.png 799 749 media_image6.png Greyscale Kishima teaches a plurality of the air guiding elements (Kishima Figure 6 Annotated). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to place multiple air guiding elements, each of which is individually identical to the air guiding element taught by Oxley modified by Lee et al., on the rear sides of the vehicle to form a plurality of air guiding elements, as taught by Kishima, because the air guiding elements extend the length of the vehicle and thereby reduce drag. The drag reduction occurs because the side air guiding elements make the vehicle more streamlined. Regarding claim 10, Oxley, as modified by Lee et al. and further modified by Kishima, discloses the motor vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the air-guiding elements are disposed in a rear region of the motor vehicle and on two oppositely disposed sides of the motor vehicle (Kishima Figure 6 Annotated). Regarding claim 11, Oxley, as modified by Lee et al. and further modified by Kishima, discloses the motor vehicle according to claim 9, wherein at least one of the plurality of air-guiding elements is longitudinally displaceable along a straight, angled, curved or arcuate track (Oxley Figure 22-23 Annotated). Regarding claim 12, Oxley, as modified by Lee et al. and further modified by Kishima, discloses the motor vehicle according to claim 9, wherein, for at least one of the plurality of air-guiding elements, the carrier element and the drive element with the gearwheel transmission are arranged in a side part or in a rear part of the motor vehicle (Lee et al. Figures 1-2 Annotated), and the surface element is displaceable through an opening of the side part or of the rear part (Lee et al. Figures 1-2 Annotated). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL R SACKINGER whose telephone number is (571) 270-0840. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 a.m. 6 p.m. ET.. 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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 5712705500. 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. /G.R.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3612 /AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
Grant Probability
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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