Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/845,883

BRAKE DEVICE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Sep 11, 2024
Priority
Mar 11, 2022 — DE 10 2022 202 445.1 +1 more
Examiner
KRAMER, DEVON C
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Continental AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
14%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 10m
Est. Remaining
30%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 14% of cases
14%
Career Allowance Rate
20 granted / 147 resolved
-46.4% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
153
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
47.2%
+7.2% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 147 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites, “optionally against the axial bearing”. It is not clear if applicant intends for the claim to positively include this limitation. Using language such as “configured to” or similar would require the device to have the ability to perform the function claimed. 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thyssenkrupp (WO2019068794). In reference to claim 1, Thyssenkrupp teaches a brake device (figure 8) for a motor vehicle comprising: a brake member (13) for generating a friction-fit with a rotating component (14); an actuator (32) which can be driven in two directions of movement and moves the brake member relative to the rotating component; an expansion unit (35, 36, 23, 24; Figures 11 and 12)of the actuator, wherein from a neutral position the expansion unit, in the one driving direction of the actuator generates a service brake by driving the actuator in one direction of movement (page 17, last paragraph), and generates a self-locking function of a parking brake by driving the actuator in the other direction of movement (page 20, para 2 and 3). As currently written, this claim reads on a plethora of brake devices. Applicant is encouraged to include the limitations of claim 2 in an independent claim along with what is in claim 1 to ensure allowability. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, and 4-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON C KRAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-7118. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Thursday 7AM-4PM; Friday Mornings. 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. 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. DEVON C. KRAMER Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Unit 3746 /DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 11, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12698813
SPRING KEEPERS AND SPRING ASSEMBLIES INCORPORATING THE SAME
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12674495
BRAKE SYSTEM WITH APPLICATION IN THE AUTOMOTIVE SECTOR WHICH DOES NOT GENERATE POLLUTING WASTE
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12663052
TUBULAR ANTIVIBRATION DEVICE
3y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12638178
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MITIGATING PARTICULATE ACCUMULATION ON A COMPONENT OF A GAS TURBINE
3y 9m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12590617
VIBRATION ISOLATION DEVICE
2y 4m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

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
14%
Grant Probability
30%
With Interview (+16.3%)
3y 9m (~1y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 147 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