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 § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1, 6-15, 19, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beneke (DE 202019102183 U1) in view of the cited non-patent literature to BMWCurves, Mays et al. (US 2017/0217261 A1; hereinafter “Mays”), Flory et al. (US 2013/0068361 A1; hereinafter “Flory”), and Dane (WO 2020/163832 A1; newly cited).
Regarding claims 1, 6-15, 19, 20 and 22, Beneke discloses a tire inflation system and a method for inflating a vehicle tire comprising: a tire pressure sensor 3 operatively coupled to a vehicle tire 2; a compressor 5 coupled to a vehicle (Fig. 1; paragraphs [0033] and [0114]), the compressor configured to provide compressed air to the vehicle tire (paragraphs [0033] and [0114]); a valve 9, 15 between the compressor and the vehicle tire; and a controller 12 configured to, in response to operation of a vehicle that includes the vehicle engine and vehicle tire, automatically initiate a tire autofill process (evident from paragraph [0088] that the continuous autofill process “during operation” of the vehicle would necessarily begin with the starting of the vehicle engine), when executed, causing the controller to: access a tire parameter (e.g., “axle loads” as described in at least paragraph [0068]) associated with the vehicle tire (paragraph [0069]); determine a cold inflation tire pressure (i.e., “normal pressure according to the manufacturer’s specifications” as described in paragraphs [0086], [0088], [0169] and [0171]) of the vehicle tire, the cold inflation tire pressure corresponding to a tire pressure of the vehicle tire before operation of the vehicle; determine a current operating condition of the vehicle (paragraphs [0068] and [0069]), including a health of the vehicle tire (i.e., “the inner tire temperature” described in paragraph [0068]); calculate an operating tire pressure for the vehicle tire by adjusting the operating tire pressure of the tire parameter based on the current operating condition of the vehicle and the cold inflation tire pressure (paragraphs [0068], [0069] and [0086-0088]); receive a tire pressure of the vehicle tire from the tire pressure sensor (paragraph [0033]); and when the tire pressure received from the tire pressure sensor is less than the operating tire pressure, cause the valve to pass pressurized air from the compressor to the vehicle tire to raise the tire pressure to the operating tire pressure (paragraph [0033]), wherein the operating tire pressure is a desired pressure (optimized “setpoint pressure” as described in at least paragraph [0068]) of the vehicle tire under the current operating condition, and is greater than the cold inflation tire pressure of vehicle tire (note the optimized “setpoint pressure” which requires an increase in tire pressure as described in at least paragraphs [0071], [0089], [0092], [0093], [0172], [0175] and [0201]) would implicitly be greater than the cold inflation tire pressure), wherein the controller is configured to (i.e., capable of) increase the tire pressure of the vehicle tire to the operating tire pressure when the controller receives an operating tire pressure engagement indication, and wherein the operating tire pressure engagement indication is associated with at least one of an engagement of a cruise control functionality, a location of a vehicle associated with the vehicle tire, or a velocity of a vehicle associated with the vehicle tire (note at least paragraph [0067]), wherein the controller is further configured to: determine a subsequent operating tire pressure based on a change in the received tire parameter; cause the vehicle tire to be inflated or deflated to the subsequent operating tire pressure (note at least paragraphs [0033], [0113] and [0114]), wherein the controller is further configured to: receive a subsequent tire pressure for the vehicle tire; determine that the subsequent tire pressure for the vehicle tire exceeds the operating tire pressure; and cause the valve to bleed air from the vehicle tire until the tire pressure for the vehicle tire is at or below the operating tire pressure (note at least paragraph [0033]), wherein the tire parameter is associated with at least one of a type of the vehicle tire, a length of time the vehicle tire has been in service, a distance associated with how far the vehicle tire has traveled, or a tread condition of the vehicle tire (note at least paragraphs [0058] and [0077]), further comprising: receiving, at a user interface, a selection of the vehicle tire; displaying the tire parameter at the user interface; receiving, at the user interface, an updated tire parameter; and storing the updated tire parameter (note at least paragraphs [0084-0086]), a vehicle (Fig. 1; paragraph [0028]) comprising a plurality of vehicle tires 2 (Fig. 1; paragraph [0035]); and wherein the operating tire pressure is different from the ideal operating tire pressure based on a difference between the current operating condition of the vehicle and normal operating conditions (evident from at least paragraphs [0038-0040], [0049], [0062], [0064], [0067-0069] and [0086]-[0088] that operating tire pressure that is optimized based on all of the possible described parameters would be different than an “ideal operating pressure” that is based solely on the optimization of the tire pressure due to axle loads).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, although Beneke discloses the controller accesses “the normal pressure according to the manufacturer’s specifications” before operation of the vehicle (i.e. “during installation”) as described in paragraphs [0086], [0088], [0169] and [0171]) which would implicitly include the cold inflation tire pressure, Beneke fails to expressly disclose that this “normal pressure” provided by the manufacturer includes both the “ideal” operating pressure of the tire parameter based on normal operating conditions while the vehicle is operated and a cold inflation tire pressure that is lower than the “ideal” operating tire pressure.
BMWCurves, however, teaches that the manufacturer can provide both an “ideal” operating pressure (i.e., 41 psi for rear tire) for a tire parameter (increased axle load due to an extra passenger and luggage) based on normal operating conditions while the vehicle is operated and a cold inflation tire pressure (i.e., 33 psi for rear tire without the increased axle load) that is lower than the “ideal” operating tire pressure (see cropped chart from page 2 provided below).
PNG
media_image1.png
175
792
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the “normal pressure according to the manufacturer’s specifications” of Beneke would have included both an “ideal” operating pressure for a tire parameter based on normal operating conditions while the vehicle is operated and a cold inflation tire pressure that is lower than the “ideal” operating tire pressure, such as taught by BMWCurves, with a reasonable expectation of success in ensuring that the controller has access to all relevant manufacturer information related to the tire to better provide an optimal tire pressure during use of the vehicle.
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, although BMWCurves, as noted above, teaches determining the current operating condition of the vehicle includes a health of the vehicle tire (i.e., “the inner tire temperature” described in paragraph [0068]), and further teaches the location of the vehicle tire on the vehicle being a current operating condition of the vehicle (evident from the cropped chart from page 2 provided above where the “ideal” operating pressure for a tire parameter is dependent upon a location (i.e., front or rear) of the vehicle tire on the vehicle, Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, fails to expressly disclose the health of the vehicle tire includes at least one of an age of the vehicle tire, a mileage of the vehicle tire, or a tread condition of the vehicle tire, and “calculating” an operating tire pressure for the vehicle tire by adjusting the ideal operating tire pressure based on the health of the vehicle tire and the location of the vehicle tire on the vehicle.
Mays, however, teaches a tire inflation system in which current operating conditions of the vehicle are determined, including a health (paragraph [0005]) of the vehicle tire and a location of the vehicle tire on the vehicle (“tire position (e.g., position on the vehicle)” per paragraph [0005]), wherein the health of the vehicle tire includes at least one of an age of the vehicle tire (“date of manufacture” per paragraph [0005]), a mileage of the vehicle tire, or a tread condition of the vehicle tire (“tire tread depth” per paragraph [0005]), and wherein an optimal operating tire pressure is calculated based on the health of the vehicle tire and the location of the vehicle tire on the vehicle (“The measured data in conjunction with the tire-specific information may be periodically transmitted to the communication device in the cab and/or to a network entity that may calculate the optimal tire pressure for each tire on the vehicle in order to maximize fuel economy, tread life, or lowest operating cost” per paragraph [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, to have included the age of the vehicle tire, the tread condition of the vehicle tire, and the location of the vehicle tire on the vehicle as some of the current operating conditions of the vehicle utilized to calculate an operating tire pressure for the vehicle tire by adjusting the ideal operating tire pressure of the tire parameter, such as taught by Mays, with a reasonable expectation of success in ensuring that each tire is provided with an optimal tire pressure during use of the vehicle.
Further regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, although Beneke discloses the use of a compressor 5 coupled to a vehicle as noted above, Beneke fails to expressly disclose the compressor being coupled to and powered by a vehicle engine.
Flory, however, teaches a tire inflation system in which “an air compressor may be driven by a vehicle engine or electrical power source” (paragraph [0017]).
From this teaching, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke so that its compressor is coupled to and powered by a vehicle engine, as a well-known arrangement that would have a reasonable expectation of success in supplying power to the air compressor.
Moreover, regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, assuming arguendo that the continuous adjustment of tire pressure “during operation” of the vehicle of Beneke is not considered to be initiated at vehicle startup (i.e., at an initiation operation of a vehicle), it is noted that Flory teaches an automatic tire pressurization process that is engaged in response to a vehicle startup (“vehicle ignition is turned on” as described in paragraphs [0028-0029]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke so that its automatic tire pressurization process is engaged in response to vehicle startup (i.e., at an initiating operation of a vehicle), such as taught by Flory, with a reasonable expectation of success in ensuring that the tires have optimal tire pressures during the entire “operation” of the vehicle.
Also, regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, although Beneke further discloses at a user interface (Fig. 7; paragraph [0084]) of the vehicle, the displaying of relevant tire information including one or more external sensor readings, target and actual pressure of each wheel, compliance with, reaching, or exceeding limit values, etc.. (paragraphs [0084], [0096] and [0110]), Beneke fails to expressly disclose all of the claimed tire information being displayed.
Dane, however, teaches a tire inflation system in which the user interface (screen 1200; Fig. 32) can display “any system setting that are specific to the associated tire set” (paragraph [0167]). Dane further expressly teaches such tire information may include the location of the vehicle tire on the vehicle (paragraph [0167]), target and current tire pressure (paragraphs [0167-1068]), “sensor alert” (paragraph [0168]), “various color bars 1210 to indicate tire status, and visual gauges 1214 to indicate fill status” (i.e., tire health; paragraph [0167]).
From this teaching, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, and Flory, so that the user interface displays any desired system setting that is specific to the associated tire set including the claimed tire information with a reasonable expectation of success in alerting the user of the tire inflation system of the performance of the individual tires in the tire inflation system to enhance safety, improve fuel efficiency, extend tire life, and optimize vehicle performance.
3. Claims 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beneke in view of BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Kantor et al. (DE 102014113062 A1; hereinafter “Kantor”).
Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, fails to expressly disclose the use of a regulator configured to provide pressurized air to an auxiliary system, wherein the air pressure of the pressurized air provided to the auxiliary system by the regulator is less than an air pressure of the pressurized air provided by the compressor.
Kantor, however, teaches a tire inflation system which includes a regulator 3 configured to provide pressurized air to an auxiliary system (pneumatic brake device described on page 3 of the English language machine translation), wherein the air pressure of the pressurized air provided to the auxiliary system by the regulator is less than an air pressure of the pressurized air provided by the compressor 14 (described in last paragraph on page 3 through first paragraph on page 4 of the English language machine translation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, by including a regulator configured to provide pressurized air to an auxiliary system wherein the air pressure of the pressurized air to the auxiliary system is less than an air pressure of the pressurized air provided by the compressor, such as taught by Kantor, with a reasonable expectation of success in ensuring that the auxiliary system is adequately pressurized while also ensuring the tires can have a higher optimum pressure level if needed and/or desired based on tire parameters.
4. Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beneke in view of BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Sowatzke et al. (US 6,269,691 B1; hereinafter “Sowatzke”).
Although Beneke discloses the use of a compressor 5 that can be used with a pressure storage tank (paragraph [0114]), Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, fails to disclose a pressure booster disposed between the compressor and the vehicle tire, the pressure booster configured to increase a pressure of the pressurized air supplied by the compressor to an air pressure that is greater than or equal to the operating tire pressure.
Sowatzke, however, teaches a tire inflation system in which a truck compressor is utilized to supply pressurized air to an accumulator or reservoir tank 12 (lines 53-54 of col. 2) wherein a pressure booster 51 is disposed between the compressor and the vehicle tire, the pressure booster configured to increase a pressure of the pressurized air supplied by the compressor to an air pressure that is greater than or equal to the operating tire pressure (Fig. 1; lines 27-30 and 44-53 of col. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, by utilizing a pressure booster disposed between the compressor and the vehicle tire, such as taught by Sowatzke, with a reasonable expectation of success in increasing a pressure of the pressurized air to ensure that the tire can quickly be inflated to the optimal operating tire pressure during use.
5. Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beneke in view of BMWCurves, Mays, Flory, Dane and Sowatzke, as applied to claims 1, 3, 15 and 17 above, and further in view of Wilson et al. (US 8,528,611 B2; hereinafter “Wilson”).
Although Beneke and Sowatzke further disclose the use of a first air tank (“pressure storage tank” described in paragraph [0114] of Beneke, reservoir tank 12 in Sowatzke) disposed between the pressure booster (booster pump 51 in Sowatzke) and the compressor (truck compressor described in lines 53-54 of col. 2 of Sowatzke), Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory, Dane and Sowatzke, fails to disclose a second air tank disposed between the pressure booster and the at least one valve, wherein the second air tank contains air at an air pressure that is greater than the air pressure of the first air tank.
Wilson, however, teaches a tire inflation system in which a second air tank 154 is disposed between a pressure booster 102 and at least one valve 112, wherein the second air tank contains air at an air pressure that is greater than the air pressure of a first air tank 52 (evident from at least the Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory, Dane and Sowatzke, by including the claimed second air tank, with a reasonable expectation of success in having a readily available higher pressure level air supply for quickly inflating the tires if needed and/or desired.
6. Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beneke in view of BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mittal et al. (US 5,629,873).
Although Beneke further discloses the controller being configured to automatically initiate the tire autofill process in response to the location of the vehicle, vehicle position, vehicle speed, direction of travel of the vehicle to optimize tire pressure when driving on a route (note at least paragraphs [0036], [0067], [0095], [0144], [0157] and [0176]), Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, fails to expressly disclose the tire autofill process automatically initiating in response to the vehicle entering a highway.
Mittal, however, teaches a controller 40 which can automatically initiate a tire autofill process in response to the vehicle entering a highway (Fig. 5d; note the selection of the operating condition “Highway” can be by “automatic control” where the “tire pressure will be adjusted with the new desired pressure for the current operating condition and load level condition” per lines 14-36 of col. 25).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the tire inflation system of Beneke, as modified by BMWCurves, Mays, Flory and Dane, so that the controller is configured to automatically initiate the autofill process in response to the vehicle entering a highway, such as taught by Mittal, with a reasonable expectation of success in ensuring that the tires have optimal tire pressures during the entire “operation” of the vehicle.
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIP T KOTTER whose telephone number is (571)272-7953. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Samuel (Joe) J Morano can be reached at (571)272-6684. 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.
/Kip T Kotter/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615