DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/20/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 31-32 and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 31 has been amended to require “wherein the first electronic control device configured to execute instructions for selectively applying pressure to the first brake circuit with the pump if components of the first brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device and the second electronic control device” and “wherein the first electronic control device configured to execute instructions for selectively applying pressure to the second brake circuit with the linear actuator if components of the second brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device and the second electronic control device”. The original disclosure fails to support a first electronic control device configured to operate both the pump of the first circuit and the linear actuator of the second circuit as required by the amended claim. The limitations therefore constitute new matter.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17, 19-24, 26-32, and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 has been amended to recite “selectively applying pressure to a second brake circuit with a discontinuously conveying linear actuator if components of the second brake circuit are available continuously conveying piston pump if components of the first brake circuit are available” which is awkward and confusing.
Claim 31 recites “so that pressure is applied to both brake circuits independently of one.” “independently of one” appears incomplete.
Claim 31 recites two instances of “a first brake circuit” and “a second brake circuit”. It is unclear if the second recitations are the same or additional circuits.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 17, 19-23, and 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by DE 10 2017 222 450.
DE ‘450 discloses all the limitation of the instant claim including; determining a failure of at least one of a first electronic control device 100 for a first brake circuit I and a second electronic control 110 device for a second brake circuit II [0043][0044]; selectively applying pressure to a first brake circuit I with a continuously conveying pump 2 if components of the first brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device 100 and the second electronic 110 [0044] and selectively applying pressure to a second brake circuit II with a discontinuously conveying linear actuator 5 if components of the second brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device 100 and the second electronic 110 so that pressure is applied to both brake circuits independently of one another. [0044][0045]
Regarding claim 19, the first brake circuit and the second brake circuit are switchably connected to one another with at least one circuit separating valve 40/140, and wherein the circuit separating valve is closed while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0044]
Regarding claim 20, DE ‘450 further discloses hydraulically decoupling a master brake cylinder 80 from the first and second brake circuits while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0029][0066][0067].
Regarding claim 21, DE ‘450 further discloses hydraulically connecting the master brake cylinder 80 exclusively to a simulator 3 while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0029][0066][0067]
Regarding claim 22, the first brake circuit and the second brake circuit are hydraulically isolated from one another while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0044]
Regarding claim 23, DE ‘450 further discloses performing a circuit-specific pressure control with one of the pump 2 and the linear actuator 5. [0044][0045]
Regarding claim 26, DE ‘450 further discloses actively reducing pressure in the second brake circuit II with the linear actuator 5. [0037]
Regarding claim 27, DE ‘450 further discloses modulating at least one of a plurality of valves 6a/6b between the pump 2 and associated wheel connections of the first brake circuit II. [0052][0130]
Regarding claim 28, DE ‘450 further discloses modulating at least one of a second plurality of valves 6b/6c between the linear actuator 5 and associated wheel connections in the second brake circuit II. [0052][0130]
Regarding claim 29, at least one of the pump 2 and the linear actuator 5 are connected at a suction side to a fluid reservoir 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.
Claim(s) 17, 19-24 and 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Besier et al (US# 2019/0031165) in view of Leiber (US# 2021/0122349) or Drumm (US# 2015/0035353).
Besier et al disclose a method for operating a brake system for a motor vehicle comprising: determining a failure of at least one of a first electronic control device 250 for a first brake circuit and a second electronic control 254 device for a second brake circuit [0065][0066], selectively applying pressure to a first brake circuit (one or more of VL or VR or HL or HL) with a pump 28 if components of the first brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device 250 and the second electronic 254 ([0065][0066], figures 4-5) and selectively applying pressure to a second brake circuit (another of VL or VR or HL or HL) with a discontinuously conveying linear actuator 32 if components of the second brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device 250 and the second electronic 254 ([0065][0066], figures 4-5) so that pressure is applied to both brake circuits independently of one another. Figure 5, [0069]-[0071]. Besier et al lack the disclosure of the pump 28 being a continuously conveying piston pump. Leiber disclose a similar brake system and further teaches the combination of a linear actuator DV1 and a continuously conveying piston type pump DV2. Drumm disclose a similar brake system and further teach a continuously conveying piston type pump 50 in place of a linear actuator 5, the pump being inexhaustible [0025]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace one of the linear actuators of Besier et al with a continuously conveying piston type pump, as taught by Leiber or Drumm, as an obvious alternative pressure device which provides an inexhaustible pressure supply, thereby insuring brake force generation and adequate braking.
Regarding claim 19, the first brake circuit and the second brake circuit are switchably connected to one another with at least one circuit separating valve 100/108, and wherein the circuit separating valve is closed while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0069]-[0071]
Regarding claim 20, Besier et al further disclose hydraulically decoupling a master brake cylinder 164 from the first and second brake circuits while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0066] figure 5.
Regarding claim 21, Besier et al further discloses hydraulically connecting the master brake cylinder 164 exclusively to a simulator 150 while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. Figure 5.
Regarding claim 22, the first brake circuit and the second brake circuit are hydraulically isolated from one another while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0069]-[0071]
Regarding claim 23, Besier et al further discloses performing a circuit-specific pressure control with one of the pump 28 and the linear actuator 32. [0069]-[0071]
Regarding claim 24, as modified, the linear actuator 32 is arranged in at least one first module 24 and the pump 28 is arranged in a second module 20, wherein the at least one first module and the second module are structurally separate from one another. [0045].
Regarding claim 26, Besier et al further discloses actively reducing pressure in the second brake circuit with the linear actuator 32. [0061]
Regarding claim 27, Besier et al further discloses modulating at least one of a plurality of valves 130/134 between the pump 28 and associated wheel connections of the first brake circuit 304.
Regarding claim 28, Besier et al further disclose modulating at least one of a second plurality of valves 138/142 between the linear actuator 32 and associated wheel connections in the second brake circuit.
Regarding claim 29, at least one of the pump 28 and the linear actuator 32 are connected at a suction side to a fluid reservoir. Figure 7.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 10 2017 222 450 in view of Alford et al (US# 2021/0179051).
DE ‘450 discloses all the limitations of the instant claim with exception to the specific disclosure of the linear actuator being arranged in at least one first module and the pump arranged in a second module, wherein the at least one first module and the second module are structurally separate from one another. Alford et al disclose a similar brake system and further teach a linear actuator 134 arranged in at least one first module 110 and a pump 192 arranged in a second module 120, wherein the at least one first module and the second module are structurally separate from one another [0017]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the pressure provisions of DE ‘450 in separate modules, as taught by Alford et al, as an alternative structural arrangement which increases flexibly in installation.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 10 2017 222 450 in view of Koyama (US# 2006/0055232).
DE ‘450 discloses all the limitations of the instant claim with exception to the specific disclosure of a non-volatile, computer-readable storage medium on which program code is stored, during the execution of which a processor executes instructions for selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. Koyama discloses a brake control device and further teaches the use of a microcomputer having a CPU, a ROM, a RAM, having programs stored in the ROM. [0074]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a known microcomputer having a CPU, a ROM, a RAM, having programs stored in the ROM, as taught by Koyama, to perform the method of DE ‘450, as an obvious means of implementing the controller with readily available hardware.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Besier et al (US# 2019/0031165) and Leiber (US# 2021/0122349) or Drumm (US# 2015/0035353), as applied to claim 17 above, in further view of Koyama (US# 2006/0055232).
Besier et al, as modified, disclose all the limitations of the instant claim with exception to the specific disclosure of a non-volatile, computer-readable storage medium on which program code is stored, during the execution of which a processor executes instructions for selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. Koyama discloses a brake control device and further teaches the use of a microcomputer having a CPU, a ROM, a RAM, having programs stored in the ROM. [0074]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a known microcomputer having a CPU, a ROM, a RAM, having programs stored in the ROM, as taught by Koyama, to perform the method of Besier et al, as an obvious means of implementing the controller with readily available hardware.
Claim(s) 31-32 and 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 10 2017 222 450 in view of Alford et al (US# 2021/0179051) and Besier et al (US# 2017/0072920).
DE ‘450 discloses a discontinuously conveying linear actuator 5; a continuously conveying piston pump 2, a first brake circuit I, wherein a first plurality of wheel connections are connected thereto; a second brake circuit II, wherein a second plurality of wheel connections are connected thereto; first electronic control device 110 for a first brake circuit and a second electronic control device 100 for a second brake circuit wherein the first electronic control device 110 configured to execute instructions for selectively applying pressure to the first brake circuit with the pump 2 if components of the first brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device and the second electronic control device [0045] so that pressure is applied to both brake circuits independently of one. DE ‘450 lack the disclosure of the linear actuator being arranged in at least one first module and the pump arranged in a second module, wherein the at least one first module and the second module are structurally separate from one another. Alford et al disclose a similar brake system and further teach a linear actuator 134 arranged in at least one first module 110 and a pump 192 arranged in a second module 120, wherein the at least one first module and the second module are structurally separate from one another [0017]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the pressure provisions of DE ‘450 in separate modules, as taught by Alford et al, as an alternative structural arrangement which increases flexibly in installation. DE ‘450 further lack the first electronic control device configured to execute instructions for selectively applying pressure to the second brake circuit with the linear actuator if components of the second brake circuit are available in response to the failure of the at least one of the first electronic control device and the second electronic control device. Instead, the linear actuator is controlled only by the second electronic control device. Besier et al disclose a similar brake system and further a control device which can actuate both a first and second pressure source [0068]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a controller which can control both pressure provisions of DE ‘450, as taught by Besier et al, to further increase the redundancy of the brake system and ensure appropriate braking in the case of failures.
Regarding claim 32, a first front wheel is provided with a first front wheel brake 8c and a second front wheel with a second front wheel brake 8d; a first rear wheel with a first rear wheel brake 8a and a second rear wheel with a second rear wheel brake 8b. DE ‘450 disclose the front wheel brakes associated with the second circuit II and the rear brakes associated with the first circuit I which is opposite of the claimed arrangement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the front brakes of DE ‘450 to the pump and the rear brakes to the linear actuator as an obvious alternative arrangement which may be better suited for vehicles of different weight distributions, such as large trucks or work vehicles.
Regarding claim 34, the first brake circuit I and the second brake circuit II are switchably connected to one another with at least one circuit separating valve 40/140, and wherein the circuit separating valve is closed while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0044]
Regarding claim 35, the master brake cylinder 80 is hydraulically decoupled from the first brake circuit while selectively applying pressure to the first brake circuit, and is hydraulically decoupled from the second brake circuit while selectively applying pressure to the second brake circuit. [0029][0066][0067].
Regarding claim 36, the first brake circuit and the second brake circuit are hydraulically isolated from one another while selectively applying pressure to the first and second brake circuit. [0044]
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejection based on Besier et al (US# 2019/0031165), Applicant’s arguments do not point out any particularly limitations lacking in the rejections. It is maintained that the rejections are proper.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY T KING whose telephone number is (571)272-7117. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-5:00 PM.
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 at 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.
/BRADLEY T KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
BTK
Prosecution Insights