DETAILED ACTION
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on 04/24/26, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. A new ground of rejection is set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/Robert A. Siconolfi/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616
The Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed 10/23/25 has been entered. Claims 1 and 4-13 are currently pending, with claims 2-3 being cancelled. In light of the substantive amendments, the previous 102 rejection is withdrawn. However, revised Drawing Objections, 112 rejections and 103 rejections of all pending claims are detailed below. 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 § 102/103
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.
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.
Glaser in view of Ma
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Glaser et al. (AU 2004201464) in view of Ma et al. (CN 108146145). Glaser is directed to a drive system for vehicles. See Abstract. Ma is directed to planetary gear reduction for an electric wheel of a vehicle. See Abstract.
Claim 1: Glaser discloses a brake system [Fig. 1] of a vehicle, comprising: a sensor (74) configured to transmit a signal; a brake control unit (70) connected to the sensor [see Fig. 2] and configured to determining a braking torque in response to the signal [see para. 0041-45 (“The control unit 70 monitors the individual wheel speeds either by means of wheel speed sensors 74 on the wheel motors 18, 32…the torque of each electric motor 18, 32 can be determined”)]; a first electric motor (18) working as an actuator connected to the BCU and configured to generate the braking torque; a braking mechanism (28) connected to the first electric motor and configured to deliver the braking torque generated by the braking mechanism; and a transmission (26) [see para. 0026 (“a planetary gear-reducing step 26”)] situated between the braking mechanism and a wheel (12) and configured to receive and amplify the braking torque delivered by the braking mechanism and apply the amplified braking torque on the wheel [see para. 0019-20 (“A preferred embodiment of the invention provides that the shiftable gearbox comprises a planetary gearbox, particularly a powershift transmission or a standard transmission. It is also beneficial to arrange at least one speed-reducing final drive transmission, especially a planetary transmission, downstream from the axle or the single-wheel drive motor. This way the drive motors can be operated in favorable speed ranges. For a compact design it is advantageous to arrange the single-wheel drive motors within the wheel rim of the associated wheel. Likewise, a change-speed gearbox that is arranged upstream from the drive motor and/or a wheel brake and/or a planetary gear-reducing step that is arranged downstream from the drive motor can be arranged within the wheel rim or in the vicinity of the wheel rims.”)]. See Figs. 1-2; para. 0017-20, 0026, 0041-45.
Glaser discloses all the limitations of claim 1. For the purpose of furthering prosecution and providing additional clarity regarding the final limitation of a transmission between the brake mechanism and wheel that receives and amplifies the brake mechanism torque and applies it to the wheel, the Ma reference will be used here. Ma discloses a brake system [Fig. 1] for a vehicle, comprising: a first electric motor (6) working as an actuator, a braking mechanism (4) connected to the first electric motor and configured to deliver the braking torque generated by the braking mechanism; and a transmission (2) situated between the braking mechanism and a wheel (1) and configured to receive and amplify the braking torque delivered by the braking mechanism and apply the amplified braking torque on the wheel [see para. 0049 (“The electromagnetic torque of the hub motor 6 is reduced and amplified by the planetary reducer 2 and then transmitted to the wheel rim 1 to drive or electrically brake the wheel.”)]. See Fig. 1. It would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to receive and amplify the braking torque from the motor using a (planetary gear) transmission because this permits a compact means of increasing the braking torque provided. Glaser already discusses the use of a “planetary gear reducing step” between the wheel and brake mechanism, but Ma provides further structural detail and is explicit in the explaining that the braking torque is received and amplified by the planetary gear system, and then delivered to the wheel.
Claim 2: see claim 1 above.
Claim 5: Glaser discloses a second electric motor (other 18, or 32), wherein the BCU can individually control the first and second electric motors to adjust both the magnitude and the direction of the braking torque on different wheels of the vehicle. See Figs. 1, 2.
Claim 6: Glaser discloses a brake controller (58, 62, 70) configured to combine a plurality of types of braking forces to produce an optimal braking effect for the wheel. See para. 0029-30; Fig. 2.
Claim 7: Glaser discloses that the plurality of types of braking forces comprises regenerative braking and friction braking. See Fig. 1; para. 0017-18.
Claim 8: Glaser discloses that the transmission amplifies the braking torque through gear reduction. See para. 0026 (“a planetary gear-reducing step”). Ma also discloses this limitation. See para. 0019-20; Fig. 1 (planetary reducer 2, sun gear 21, planet carrier 22).
Claim 9: Glaser discloses that the transmission comprises one of single stage planetary gear reduction transmission, multi-stage planetary gear reduction transmission, spur/helix gear reduction transmission, and CVT transmission. See para. 0026 (“a planetary gear-reducing step”). Ma also discloses this limitation. See para. 0019-20; Fig. 1 (planetary reducer 2, sun gear 21, planet carrier 22).
Claim 10: Glaser discloses that the brake mechanism passes the brake torque to the transmission through a shaft (24) connecting the brake mechanism and the transmission. See Fig. 1.
Claim 11: Glaser discloses that the transmission is built in the wheel. See para. 0020 (“…arranged within the wheel rim…”. Ma also discloses this limitation. See Fig. 1.
Glaser in view of Ma and Mutoh
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glaser in view of Ma and Mutoh (WO 2011/114557) (previously cited). Mutoh is directed to an electric vehicle and braking program. See Abstract.
Claim 3: Glaser discloses a vehicle comprising: a first, second, third, and fourth wheels (12, 16); a first electric motor (18) and a second electric motor (32); a first and a second braking mechanisms (28); a third and a fourth braking mechanisms (42); a brake control unit (70) connected to the first and second electric motors and configured to transmit a first and second braking requirements to the first electric motors and transmit a third and fourth braking requirements to the second electric motors, the first electric motors generating based on the first and second braking requirements, respectively, a first and a second torque for braking the first and second wheels, respectively, the second electric motors generating based on the third and fourth braking requirements, a third and a fourth torque for braking the third and fourth wheels; and a first, second, third, and fourth transmissions (26, 38) connected to the first, second, third, and fourth wheels, respectively, the first, second, third, and fourth transmissions configured to receive and amplify the first, second, third, and fourth torque, respectively, and apply the amplified first, second, third, and fourth torque on the first, second, third, and fourth wheels, respectively [see para. 0019-20]. See Figs. 1-2; para. 0017-20, 0026, 0041-45.
As stated above with regard to claim 1, for the purpose of furthering prosecution and providing additional clarity regarding the final limitation of a transmission between the brake mechanism and wheel that receives and amplifies the brake mechanism torque and applies it to the wheel, the Ma reference will be used here. Ma discloses a brake system [Fig. 1] for a vehicle, comprising: a first electric motor (6) working as an actuator, a braking mechanism (4) connected to the first electric motor and configured to deliver the braking torque generated by the braking mechanism; and a transmission (2) situated between the braking mechanism and a wheel (1) and configured to receive and amplify the braking torque delivered by the braking mechanism and apply the amplified braking torque on the wheel [see para. 0049 (“The electromagnetic torque of the hub motor 6 is reduced and amplified by the planetary reducer 2 and then transmitted to the wheel rim 1 to drive or electrically brake the wheel.”)]. See Fig. 1. It would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to receive and amplify the braking torque from the motor using a (planetary gear) transmission because this permits a compact means of increasing the braking torque provided. Glaser already discusses the use of a “planetary gear reducing step” between the wheel and brake mechanism, but Ma provides further structural detail and is explicit in the explaining that the braking torque is received and amplified by the planetary gear system, and then delivered to the wheel.
Glaser discloses all the limitations of this claim except for the use of a first and second differential. Mutoh discloses a vehicle comprising: a first, second, third, and fourth wheels (2fl, 2fr, 2rl, 2rr); a first electric motor (3f) and a second electric motor (3r); a first differential (4f) connecting the first electric motor to a first and a second braking mechanisms (18fl, 18fr); a second differential (4r) connecting the second electric motor to a third and a fourth braking mechanisms (18rl, 18rr); a brake control unit (10) connected to the first and second electric motors and configured to transmit a first and second braking requirements to the first electric motor and transmit a third and fourth braking requirements to the second electric motor, the first electric motor generating based on the first and second braking requirements, respectively, a first and a second torque for braking the first and second wheels, respectively, the second electric motor generating based on the third and fourth braking requirements, a third and a fourth torque for braking the third and fourth wheels. See Figs. 1, 2. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to employ first and second differentials because this is an alternative to employing a motor at each of the four wheels as in Glaser, instead using a single motor per axle (for a pair of wheels) and a differential to differentiate torques/speeds of the two wheels at a given axle. This may provide certain design advantages, like compactness, cost-effectiveness and simplicity.
Claim 4: Glaser and Ma are relied upon as in claim 1 above but do not discuss the use of a differential. Mutoh discloses a vehicle comprising: a first, second, third, and fourth wheels (2fl, 2fr, 2rl, 2rr); a first electric motor (3f) and a second electric motor (3r); a first differential (4f) connecting the first electric motor to a first and a second braking mechanisms (18fl, 18fr); a second differential (4r) connecting the second electric motor to a third and a fourth braking mechanisms (18rl, 18rr); a brake control unit (10) connected to the first and second electric motors and configured to transmit a first and second braking requirements to the first electric motor and transmit a third and fourth braking requirements to the second electric motor, the first electric motor generating based on the first and second braking requirements, respectively, a first and a second torque for braking the first and second wheels, respectively, the second electric motor generating based on the third and fourth braking requirements, a third and a fourth torque for braking the third and fourth wheels. See Figs. 1, 2. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to employ first and second differentials because this is an alternative to employing a motor at each of the four wheels as in Glaser, instead using a single motor per axle (for a pair of wheels) and a differential to differentiate torques/speeds of the two wheels at a given axle. This may provide certain design advantages, like compactness, cost-effectiveness and simplicity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL R SAHNI whose telephone number is (571)270-3838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm PST.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached on 571-272-7124. 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.
VISHAL SAHNI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3657
/VISHAL R SAHNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657 June 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights