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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 11/7/2025, have been fully considered and the examiner’s responses are given below.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection is withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejection is withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections are withdrawn, however new grounds is presented below.
Applicant’s arguments are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection presented below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 11, 13, 15, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hecker (DE 102014013756 B3) in view of Pasquet (US 20200102008 A1) and Rosol (US 20140214256 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Hecker discloses a control architecture for electrified braking and electrified steering of a vehicle, the control architecture comprising (Pages 6-9 Paragraphs 1-3);
at least two energy supply units (Page 9 Paragraph 3, Fig. 3 and 4 [Elements 126 (first energy source) and 128 (second energy source)]);
a steering actuator; a steering controller (Page 31-32 Paragraphs 6-1);
at least one brake control unit, wherein a first brake control unit of the at least one brake control unit is supplied with electric power from the second of the at least two energy supply units (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1; first brake control unit is mapped to EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device]; second of the two energy supply units is mapped to first electrical energy source (126));
the steering actuator and steering controller are configured to be supplied with electric power from a first one of the at least two energy supply units (Page 30-31 Paragraphs 3-2, Fig. 4; Steering actuator is mapped to steering wheel (28) and steering gear (30); Steering controller is mapped to electronic steering control device; first one of the two energy supply units is mapped to second energy source (128));
two electrically controlled power brake actuators (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
are configured to be supplied with electric power from a second one of the at least two energy supply units (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
a first brake actuator is associated with a first wheel of the vehicle and a second brake actuator is associated with a second wheel of the vehicle (Page 22 Paragraphs 2, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
Hecker does not specifically state two electric power brake actuators; two electrically powered power brake actuators.
However, Pasquet teaches two electric power brake actuators (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1; electric power brake actuators is mapped to electromechanical actuators (74));
two electrically powered power brake actuators (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with two electrically powered brake actuators of Pasquet with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that using electric brake actuators can save space and weight over hydraulic and pneumatic brakes. These electric brake actuators offer precise braking in emergency situations such as requiring brake steering when the steering actuators have failed. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Pasquet as this reduces complexity, mass, and size of the vehicle. As stated in Pasquet, “When the front 6.sub.FL, 6.sub.FR and rear 6.sub.RL, 6.sub.RR brakes are purely electromechanical, the hydraulic circuit 82 can be omitted and be replaced by hardware and/or software means for an electric brake control according to the invention, which limits the complexity of the braking system 2, mass and overall size of the vehicle 1” (Paragraph 0105).
Hecker does not specifically state actuation of the first power brake actuator and the second power brake actuator is configured to perform a steering function for the vehicle; and the first brake actuator and second brake actuator are associated with the two wheels of a same axle of the vehicle.
However, Rosol teaches actuation of the first power brake actuator and the second power brake actuator is configured to perform a steering function for the vehicle (Paragraph 0042, 0050);
and the first brake actuator and second brake actuator are associated with the two wheels of a same axle of the vehicle (Paragraph 0042, 0050, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with actuating the first and second power brake actuator to perform a steering function for the vehicle, where the first and second brake actuators are associated with the same axle of Rosol with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that it is possible to steer the vehicle by applying brakes. Two brakes on a same axle can be differentially applied to slow the vehicle down while also generating a yaw moment. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Rosol as this achieves stability during steering failure. As stated in Rosol, “actuating 2002 at least one of the first brake 56 and the second brake 60 to generate at least one yaw moment to steer the vehicle 12 when the interruption occurs in the primary steering of the vehicle 12”.
Regarding claim 13, Hecker discloses the first brake actuator and/or second brake actuator are configured to perform the steering function for the vehicle upon detection of a failure or malfunction in one or more of: the first one of the energy supply units, the steering actuator, or the steering controller (Page 10 Paragraph 2, Page 13 Paragraph 3).
Hecker does not specifically state the first electric power brake actuator and/or second electric power brake actuator.
However, Pasquet teaches the first electric power brake actuator and/or second electric power brake actuator (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with two electrically powered brake actuators of Pasquet with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that using electric brake actuators can save space and weight over hydraulic and pneumatic brakes. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Pasquet as this reduces complexity, mass, and size of the vehicle. As stated in Pasquet, “When the front 6.sub.FL, 6.sub.FR and rear 6.sub.RL, 6.sub.RR brakes are purely electromechanical, the hydraulic circuit 82 can be omitted and be replaced by hardware and/or software means for an electric brake control according to the invention, which limits the complexity of the braking system 2, mass and overall size of the vehicle 1” (Paragraph 0105).
Regarding claim 15, Hecker discloses the first brake control unit (Page 32 Paragraphs 2-3).
Hecker does not specifically state control actuation of the first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator to perform the steering function.
However, Pasquet teaches control actuation of the first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator to perform the steering function (Paragraphs 0046-0056, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with two electrically powered brake actuators and performing a steering function with the brake actuators of Pasquet with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that using electric brake actuators can save space and weight over hydraulic and pneumatic brakes. These electric brake actuators offer precise braking in emergency situations such as requiring brake steering when the steering actuators have failed. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Pasquet as this reduces complexity, mass, and size of the vehicle. As stated in Pasquet, “thanks to the trajectory modifier and in particular to the local control unit, it is possible to steer the vehicle in the event that the steering system is failing, while limiting the complexity of the vehicle, its mass and overall size. The trajectory modifier limits accident risks in the event that the steering system is failing” (Paragraph 0009).
Regarding claim 21, Hecker discloses a second energy source and an energy supply line to directly electrically connect the brake actuators (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1).
Hecker does not specifically state the electric brake actuators.
However Pasquet teaches the electric brake actuators (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with two electrically powered brake actuators of Pasquet with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that using electric brake actuators can save space and weight over hydraulic and pneumatic brakes. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Pasquet as this reduces complexity, mass, and size of the vehicle. As stated in Pasquet, “When the front 6.sub.FL, 6.sub.FR and rear 6.sub.RL, 6.sub.RR brakes are purely electromechanical, the hydraulic circuit 82 can be omitted and be replaced by hardware and/or software means for an electric brake control according to the invention, which limits the complexity of the braking system 2, mass and overall size of the vehicle 1” (Paragraph 0105).
Regarding claim 23, Hecker discloses the steering actuator and the brake actuators are configured to receive electric power from separate energy supply circuits (Page 28 Paragraph 3, Page 30 Paragraph 4 – Page 31 Paragraph 1).
Claims 16, 18, 20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hecker (DE 102014013756 B3) in view of Pasquet (US 20200102008 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Hecker discloses a control method for a control architecture for electrified braking and electrified steering of a vehicle, the method comprising (Pages 6-9 Paragraphs 1-3);
supplying a steering actuator and a steering controller with electric power from a first one of at least two energy supply units (Page 30-31 Paragraphs 3-2, Fig. 4; Steering actuator is mapped to steering wheel (28) and steering gear (30); Steering controller is mapped to electronic steering control device; first one of two energy supply units is mapped to second energy source (128));
supplying two electrically controlled power brake actuators (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
with electric power from a second one of the at least two energy supply units (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]); Second one of two energy supply units is mapped to first electrical energy source (126));
a first brake actuator is associated with a first wheel of the vehicle and a second brake actuator is associated with a second wheel of the vehicle (Page 22 Paragraphs 2, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
the first brake actuator and second brake actuator are associated with the two wheels of a same axle of the vehicle (Page 22 Paragraphs 2, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
the control architecture comprises at least one brake control unit (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1; first brake control unit is mapped to EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device]);
with electric power from a second one of the at least two energy supply units (Page 22 Paragraphs 2, Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
the first brake actuator is associated with a first wheel of the vehicle and the second brake actuator is associated with a second wheel of the vehicle (Page 22 Paragraph 2, Page 41 Paragraph 5 – Page 42 Paragraph 1, Fig. 2 (Elements EBS-ECU [electronic brake control device], 118 [wheel brake actuator/cylinder], 114 [electropneumatic pressure control module], and 126 [first electrical energy source]));
supplying a first brake control unit of the at least one brake control unit with electric power from a second of the at least two energy supply units (Page 28-29 Paragraph 3-1).
Hecker does not specifically state supplying two electrically powered power brake actuators; a first electric power brake actuator and a second electric power brake actuator; actuating the first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator to perform a steering function for the vehicle.
However, Pasquet teaches supplying two electrically powered power brake actuators (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1; two electric power brake actuators is mapped to electromechanical actuators (74));
a first electric power brake actuator and a second electric power brake actuator (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1);
actuating the first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator to perform a steering function for the vehicle (Paragraphs 0054-0056).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with two electrically powered brake actuators and performing a steering function with the brake actuators of Pasquet with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that using electric brake actuators can save space and weight over hydraulic and pneumatic brakes. These electric brake actuators offer precise braking in emergency situations such as requiring brake steering when the steering actuators have failed. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Pasquet as this reduces complexity, mass, and size of the vehicle. As stated in Pasquet, “When the front 6.sub.FL, 6.sub.FR and rear 6.sub.RL, 6.sub.RR brakes are purely electromechanical, the hydraulic circuit 82 can be omitted and be replaced by hardware and/or software means for an electric brake control according to the invention, which limits the complexity of the braking system 2, mass and overall size of the vehicle 1” (Paragraph 0105).
Regarding claim 18, Hecker discloses detecting a failure or malfunction in one or more of: the first one of the energy supply units; the steering actuator; or the steering controller, and wherein the actuating of the first brake actuator and/or the second brake actuator to perform a steering function for the vehicle is performed after the failure or malfunction has been detected (Page 10 Paragraph 2, Page 13 Paragraph 3).
Hecker does not specifically state first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator.
However, Pasquet teaches first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with two electrically powered brake actuators of Pasquet with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that using electric brake actuators can save space and weight over hydraulic and pneumatic brakes. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Pasquet as this reduces complexity, mass, and size of the vehicle. As stated in Pasquet, “When the front 6.sub.FL, 6.sub.FR and rear 6.sub.RL, 6.sub.RR brakes are purely electromechanical, the hydraulic circuit 82 can be omitted and be replaced by hardware and/or software means for an electric brake control according to the invention, which limits the complexity of the braking system 2, mass and overall size of the vehicle 1” (Paragraph 0105).
Regarding claim 20, Hecker discloses the first brake control unit controls actuation of the first brake actuator and/or the second brake actuator to perform the steering function (Page 32 Paragraphs 2-3).
Hecker does not specifically state the first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator.
However, Pasquet teaches the first electric power brake actuator and/or the second electric power brake actuator (Paragraphs 0046-0052, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with two electrically powered brake actuators of Pasquet with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that using electric brake actuators can save space and weight over hydraulic and pneumatic brakes. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Pasquet as this reduces complexity, mass, and size of the vehicle. As stated in Pasquet, “When the front 6.sub.FL, 6.sub.FR and rear 6.sub.RL, 6.sub.RR brakes are purely electromechanical, the hydraulic circuit 82 can be omitted and be replaced by hardware and/or software means for an electric brake control according to the invention, which limits the complexity of the braking system 2, mass and overall size of the vehicle 1” (Paragraph 0105).
Regarding claim 22, all limitations have been examined with respect to the control architecture in claim 21. The method taught/disclosed in claim 22 can be clearly performed with the control architecture of claim 21. Therefore, claim 22 is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hecker, Pasquet, and Rosol, as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Rothhamel (US 20200216045 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Hecker discloses the control architecture comprises (Pages 6 Paragraph 1 – Page 9 Paragraphs 3).
Hecker does not specifically state a steering roll radius to enable steering by braking.
However, Rothhamel teaches a steering roll radius to enable steering by braking (Paragraphs 0009-0013, 0077).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hecker with a steering roll radius of Rothhamel with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a positive scrub radius enables steering by braking by steering the vehicle towards the side of the wheel with more braking force, while a vehicle with negative scrub radius tends to steer the vehicle straight when braking. One would have been motivated to combine Hecker with Rothhamel as this achieves enablement of steering by braking. As stated in Rothhamel, “the positive scrub radius enables steering support by differential wheel braking” (Paragraph 0013).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to Matthew Ho whose telephone number is (571) 272-1388. The examiner can
normally be reached on Mon-Thurs 9:00-5:30 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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached on (571)-272-7691. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications are available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (tollfree). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/MATTHEW HO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669