Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/032,649

DOOR MODULE OF A VEHICLE DOOR AND VEHICLE DOOR HAVING THE DOOR MODULE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 21, 2025
Examiner
PONCIANO, PATRICK BERNAS
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Brose Fahrzeugteile SE & Co. Kommanditgesellschaft Bamberg
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
50 granted / 87 resolved
+5.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
132
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
39.9%
-0.1% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 87 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 01/21/2025. Claims 1-19 are currently pending and have been examined below. Drawings The drawings are objected to because: PNG media_image1.png 493 777 media_image1.png Greyscale In figure 3, where is the cable deflection region? Is the cable deflection region behind the operating region 44? 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. Claim Objections Claims 16-17 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 2-3 of claim 16, “the vehicle” should read --a vehicle--. Note that this issue is also present in claim 19. In line 18 of claim 17, “and_stabilizing said” should read --and stabilizing said--. Appropriate correction is required. Above provides non-limiting examples, the applicant(s) must find and correct all issues similar to those discussed above. 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. Claims 1, 4-10, and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Furuyama et al. (US 6616216) (hereinafter “Furuyama”). Claims 1 and 17 (Furuyama discloses) “A door module (figures 1-6 and 13) of a vehicle door (1), the door module comprising:” (claim 1); “A vehicle door (1), comprising a door module (figures 1-6 and 13) including:” (claim 17); a carrier plate (13; figure 5) mounted inside the vehicle door, said carrier plate having an outer edge (13a); a cable window regulator (5) having at least one guide rail (7), said cable window regulator being mounted onto said carrier plate (figure 5); a door structure (2) being separate from and configured to be joined to said carrier plate (figure 5), said door structure having a receiving contour (2b; figure 13); said guide rail having a cable deflection region (Annotated figure 13 below) extending beyond said outer edge of said carrier plate (Annotated figure 13 below); said cable deflection region having a joining contour (9) protruding from and being formed in one piece with said cable deflection region (Annotated figure 13 below), said joining contour being permanently form-lockingly inserted in said receiving contour as a door subassembly of the vehicle door upon assembling the vehicle door (figures 3-4 and 13); said joining contour configured to be inserted in said receiving contour in a rail longitudinal direction of said guide rail (Annotated figure 13 below; the joining contour is inserted and moved along the rail longitudinal direction to lock with the receiving contour), said rail longitudinal direction being oriented approximately parallel to a vehicle height direction (figures 3-4); and said joining contour engaging behind said receiving contour and holding and stabilizing said cable deflection region in a direction perpendicular to said cable deflection region (Annotated figure 13 below) (claims 1 and 17). PNG media_image2.png 643 607 media_image2.png Greyscale Annotated figure 13 Claim 4 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 1 , wherein at least said cable deflection region is an injection-molded part (note that this was interpreted as product-by-process limitation; see MPEP 2113). Claim 5 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 4, wherein said joining contour is injection-molded without a slide (note that this was interpreted as product-by-process limitation; see MPEP 2113). Claim 6 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 1 , wherein said joining contour has a T-shaped cross-sectional shape (lines 52-57 of col. 7). Claim 7 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 6, wherein said T-shaped cross-sectional shape of said joining contour includes: a vertical T-shaped limb (Annotated figure 13 above) engaging form-lockingly in a guide slot (vertical narrow slot of 2b; figure 13) of said receiving contour, and a horizontal T-shaped limb (Annotated figure 13 above) engaging behind said receiving contour (Annotated figure 13 above). Claim 8 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 1 , wherein said joining contour has two bearing surfaces facing one another for said door structure (Partial Annotated figure 13 below), and said receiving contour has a mating surface form-lockingly gripped between said bearing surfaces (Annotated figure 13 above). PNG media_image3.png 548 562 media_image3.png Greyscale Partial Annotated figure 13 Claim 9 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 8, wherein said mating surface has a stepped contour encompassed by said bearing surfaces (figure 13 only shows a small portion of the receiving contour, however figure 7 shows a stepped contour of the mating surface of the receiving contour). Claim 10 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 8, wherein at least one of said bearing surfaces has a free end side with a lead-in portion (Partial Annotated figure 13 above). Claim 12 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 1 , wherein said joining contour has a reinforcing rib (Partial Annotated figure 13 above). Claim 13 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 1 , wherein said joining contour is engaged behind said receiving contour in a vehicle transverse direction (Annotated figure 13 above). Claim 14 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 1 , wherein said joining contour is hooked behind said receiving contour (figure 13). Claims 15 and 18 (Furuyama discloses) “The door module according to claim 1” (claim 15); “The vehicle door according to claim 17” (claim 18); wherein said form-locking insertion of said joining contour into said receiving contour produces a mechanical coupling between said cable deflection region and said door structure mechanically stabilizing said cable deflection region regarding forces occurring during operation (see entire assembly in figures 3-4). Claims 16 and 19 (Furuyama discloses) “The door module according to claim 1” (claim 16); “The vehicle door according to claim 17” (claim 19); wherein said form-locking insertion of said joining contour into said receiving contour is present during operation of the vehicle (figures 3-4). 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 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuyama, as applied to claims 1, 4-10, and 12-19 above, in view of Staser et al. (US 7882658) (hereinafter “Staser”). Claim 2 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 1. Furuyama is silent regarding wherein said cable deflection region has a bearing point without screws or bolts, and a cable deflection pulley is rotatably mounted on said bearing point. (However, Staser teaches) wherein a cable deflection region (deflection region shown in Staser figure 16) has a bearing point (22) without screws or bolts (Excerpt 1 from col. 10 below discussing the pulley is held via features such as 36 and 38), and a cable deflection pulley (24) is rotatably mounted on said bearing point. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the cable deflection region of Furuyama with the bearing point without screws or bolts as taught by Staser, with a reasonable expectation of success, for limiting the loose fastening parts as such limiting the use of assembly tools such as screw driver while also eliminating the risk of the screws or bolts from loosening overtime. PNG media_image4.png 131 499 media_image4.png Greyscale Excerpt 1 Claim 3 (Furuyama, as modified above, discloses) The door module according to claim 2, wherein said joining contour is disposed on a side of said cable deflection region opposing said bearing point (see figures 4 and 6 showing the bearing point of Furuyama at the front and the joining contour at the back). Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuyama, as applied to claims 1, 4-10, and 12-19 above. Claim 11 (Furuyama discloses) The door module according to claim 8. Furuyama is silent regarding wherein said joining contour is at least partially resilient. However, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice, therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the joining contour of Furuyama such that it is at least partially resilient, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the predictable benefits of dampening vibration and noise while also providing sealing capabilities with the receiving contour. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00. 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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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. /PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634 /CATHERINE A KELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 21, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600213
QUICKLY ASSEMBLED AND DISASSEMBLED WINDOW FRAME STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584346
DEPLOYABLE DOORWAY BUMPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584338
STACKING SCREEN DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576698
VEHICLE DOOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577823
MULTI-PANEL DOOR SYSTEM, AND DUAL-SYNCHRONIZATION DRIVE ASSEMBLY FOR A MULTI-PANEL DOOR SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
58%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+14.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 87 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