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 § 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) 15-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Budzynski (US 2003009210 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Budzynski teaches an external handle (fig. 7) for a leaf element of a vehicle, with at least two surface regions pointing away from each other (15 is inside, 22 is outside), the external handle comprising: at least one sensor (13), by way of which both an operation of a first of the surface regions effected by a person and intended to effect a first function (19) and an operation of the second surface region pointing away from the first surface region effected by the person and intended to effect the first function or a second function (20) can be detected (para. 0071).
Regarding claim 16, Budzynski teaches the external handle according to Claim 15, wherein the sensor provides an electric and/or magnetic field (para. 0075) and is designed to detect both a first change in the field resulting from the operation of the first surface region (19) and thus the operation of the first surface region and a second change in the field resulting from the operation of the second surface region (20) and thus the operation of the second surface region (para. 0075).
Regarding claim 17, Budzynski teaches the external handle according to Claim 16, wherein: a first detection element (27 on inside of handle) provided in addition to the sensor is associated with the first surface region, which detection element can be moved in a first direction relative to the sensor (direction of arrow 19 in fig. 7) and relative to the field by the operation of the first surface region in a first direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field, thereby effecting the first change (para. 0075); and a second detection element (27 on outside of handle) provided in addition to the sensor and in addition to the first detection element is associated with the second surface region, which second detection element is movable relative to the sensor and relative to the field in a second direction (direction of arrow 20 In fig. 7) opposite to the first direction by the operation of the second surface region, thereby effecting the second change (para. 0075).
Regarding claim 18, Budzynski teaches the external handle according to Claim 17, wherein: the first surface region is moveable in the first direction by actuating the first surface region in the first direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field (19), wherein the first detection element is coupled to the first surface region and thereby movable with the first surface region in the first direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field (fig. 7, 19); and the second surface region is movable in the second direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field by actuation of the second surface region (fig. 7, 20).
Regarding claim 19, Budzynski teaches the external handle according to Claim 15, wherein the sensor has at least one strain gauge (para. 0073).
Regarding claim 20, Budzynski teaches the external handle according to claim 15, wherein the sensor is designed as an inductive sensor (para. 0075).
Regarding claim 21, Budzynski teaches an arrangement of an external handle on a leaf element for a vehicle (fig. 7), in which the external handle is held on the leaf element and has at least two surface regions pointing away from one another (15 and 22), the external handle comprising: at least one sensor (13), by way of which both an actuation of a first surface region (19) caused by a person and intended to effect a first function (19) and an actuation of the second surface region (20) pointing away from the first surface region caused by the person and intended to effect the first function or a second function (20) can be detected (fig. 7; para. 0075).
Regarding claim 22, Budzynski teaches the arrangement according to Claim 21, wherein one of the surface regions is facing the leaf element (15) and facing away from the other surface region, wherein the other surface region (22) is facing away from the leaf element and facing away from the one surface region (fig. 7).
Regarding claim 23, Budzynski teaches the arrangement according to Claim 21, wherein: the first surface region is associated with a first detection element (26 on inside of door handle) which is provided in addition to the sensor and which can be moved in a first direction (direction of arrow 19) relative to the sensor and relative to the field by the in a first direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field, thereby effecting the first change (19); the second surface region is associated with a second detection element (26 on outside of door handle) provided in addition to the sensor and in addition to the first detection element, which second detection element is movable relative to the sensor and relative to the field in a second direction (direction of arrow 20) opposite to the first direction by the operation of the second surface region, thereby effecting the second change.
Regarding claim 24, Budzynski teaches the arrangement according to Claim 23, wherein: the first surface region (1%) is movable in the first direction (19) relative to the sensor and relative to the field by the actuation of the first surface region, the first detection element being coupled to the first surface region and thereby co-movable with the first surface region in the first direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field (fig. 7); and the second surface region (22) is movable in the second direction (20) relative to the sensor and relative to the field by the actuation of the second surface region, the second detection element being coupled to the second surface region and thereby co-movable with the second surface region in the second direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field (fig. 7), wherein the second detection element is coupled to the second surface region and thereby movable with the second surface region in the second direction relative to the sensor and relative to the field (fig. 7).
Regarding claim 25, Budzynski teaches the arrangement according to Claim 23, wherein one of the directions points away from the leaf element starting from the respective surface region (arrow 19) and the other direction points towards the leaf element starting from the respective surface region (arrow 20).
Regarding claim 26, Budzynski teaches the arrangement according to one of Claim 21, wherein the first function comprises an electrical unlocking of a lock (para. 0050), by way of which the leaf element, which can be arranged movably on a body of the motor vehicle between a closed position and at least one open position, is to be secured in the closed position (para. 0050).
Regarding claim 27, Budzynski teaches the arrangement according to Claim 21, wherein the second function comprises the electrical unlocking of the lock and additionally an automatic movement of the leaf element from the closed position and the open position effected by way of an actuator (para. 0050), whereby in the first function the automatic movement of the leaf element from the closed position into the open position effected by way of the actuator is omitted (para. 0050, the door lock can open the motor vehicle door thus requiring some sort of actuator).
Regarding claim 28, Budzynski teaches a vehicle, with at least one arrangement according to claim 21 (fig. 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES EDWARD IGNACZEWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571)272-7376. 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.
/J.E.I./ Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights