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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/7/26 has been entered.
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) 1, 2, 4-6, 10-12, 19, 21, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application 2014/0097667 to Backes III et al.
Re: claims 1 and 30. Backes III et al. shows in figures 1, 4, and 5 a braking system for braking a train, the train incorporating one or more locomotives as described in paragraph [0046], the braking system comprises: a first braking system or the illustrated components shown other than elements 14, 16, 30, 32, 42, and 48 in the form of an electronically controlled pneumatic brake network (ECP); a second braking system comprising a brake pipe 32 and a set of brakes 14, wherein when the braking pipe 32 is pressurized above a predetermined pressure the set of brakes are in a released condition as understood from paragraphs [0035 – 0037] i.e. the pressure at which the brakes are activated as described in the cited section is the predetermined pressure and above which predetermined pressure the brakes are released; a brake activation unit 16, the brake activation unit providing status reports regarding the condition of the ECP as described in paragraph [0029], the brake activation unit comprising: at least one sensor or the another component additionally providing the feedback signal 46 described in paragraph [0038] for or capable of monitoring one or more properties of the ECP; and at least one brake pipe sensor 42 for measuring the pressure in the brake pipe; at least one valve 30 adapted to vent the pressure from the brake pipe; and a telecommunication network 48 adapted to communicate with the brake activation unit; wherein the brake activation unit can be activated using the telecommunication network to vent the pressure from the brake pipe, causing the train to brake.
Re: claim 2. Backes III et al. show in figures 1, 4, and 5 wherein the at least one sensor 42 monitors the pressure of the brake pipe and/or the integrity of a train line as described in paragraph [0021].
Re: claim 4. Backes III et al. show in figures 1, 4, and 5 wherein the brake activation unit 16 is activated when the condition of the ECP 14 as reported by the brake activation unit is in conflict to the required condition of the train i.e., for example not responsive to the first control signal as described in paragraph [0029].
Re: claims 5, 6, and 31. Backes III et al. show in figures 1, 4, and 5 wherein the brake activation unit is activated remotely as described in paragraph [0033] and [0036] to move to a venting condition and wherein the air is vented from the brake pipe.
Re: claim 10. Backes III et al. show in figures 1, 4, and 5 wherein the brake activation unit 16 is activated from within the train or is activated from a geographical location different from the train as described in paragraph [0033].
Re: claim 11. Backes III et al. show in figures 1, 4, and 5 wherein the brake activation unit remains in a venting condition once activated until it is deactivated, wherein deactivation requires replacement of a venting component or the physically resetting of the brake activation unit to the non-venting condition allowing the brake to recharge as described in paragraph [0034] i.e. physically removing or changing the electric charge as broadly recited.
Re: claim 12. Backes III et al. show in figures 1, 4, and 5 wherein the brake activation unit is reset by the changing of the electric charge from the locomotive as understood from paragraph [0034].
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 (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 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) 8, 15, 19, 21, and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Backes III et al. in view of US Patent Application 2011/0154893 to Fugiel.
Re: claims 8 and 33. Backes III et al. are silent with regards to the telecommunications network comprising a series of base stations and transmitting towers and/or radio receivers within one or more locomotives.
Fugiel teaches in paragraph [0023-0024] the use of a telecommunications network comprising a series of base stations and transmitting towers and/or radio receivers within one or more locomotives.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the telecommunications network of Backes III et al., to have comprised a series of base stations and transmitting towers and/or radio receivers within one or more locomotives, in view of the teachings of Fugiel, in order to provide a means of reliable wireless communication.
Re: claim 15. Backes III et al. disclose reporting pressure information to the operator in paragraph [0053] and has a unit that is capable of being removed with sufficient force as broadly recited, but are silent with regards to the brake activation unit being incorporated in an end of train unit.
Fugiel teaches in figure 1A the sensor portion 18 of a brake activation unit of a rail vehicle being incorporated in an end of train unit 14.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake activation unit of Backes III et al., to have been incorporated in an end of train unit, in view of the teachings of Fugiel, in order to provide a means of measuring the pressure at the end of the brake line to be able to effectively control pressure supply to compensate for pressure loss along the way to the end of the brake line.
Re: claim 19. Backes III et al. show in figures 1, 4 and 5 a brake activation unit 16 which upon activation causes a braking system of a train to brake the train, the train incorporating one or more locomotives as described in paragraph [0046], the braking system comprises a first braking system or the illustrated components shown other than elements 14, 16, 30, 32, 42, and 48 in the form of an electronically controlled pneumatic brake network (ECP), and a second braking system comprising a brake pipe 32; the brake activation unit comprises: at least one valve adapted to vent pressure from the brake pipe of the train as described in paragraph [0055]; and a telecommunication network 48 adapted to communicate with the valve to selectively move the valve to an open position to vent the pressure from the brake pipe; wherein the brake activation unit 16 is activated when the one or more locomotives does not receive a signal 20 as understood from paragraph [0030] using an emergency application of the ECP via signal 24, but is silent with regard to the limitation wherein the brake activation unit measures the pressure at a position at an end of the train, and uses an electronically controlled pneumatic brake network (ECP) trainline to report the measured pressure.
Fugiel teaches in figure 1A the sensor portion 18 of a brake activation unit of a rail vehicle being incorporated in an end of train unit 14.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake activation unit of Backes III et al. to have been incorporated in an end of train unit, in view of the teachings of Fugiel, in order to provide a means of measuring the pressure at the end of the brake line to be able to effectively control pressure supply to compensate for pressure loss along the way to the end of the brake line. Examiner notes that the combination would result in the dump valve, which forms a part of the brake activation unit, discharging through the end thereof since the brake activation unit is placed at the end thereof.
Re: claim 21. Backes III et al., as modified, teach in figures 1, 4, and 5 of Backes III et al. wherein the brake activation unit comprises a brake pipe sensor 42 for measuring the pressure in the brake pipe.
Claim(s) 13, 14, 18, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Backes III et al. in view of US Patent 5941280 to Hart et al.
Re: claims 13, 18, and 35. Backes III et al. show in figure 5 and discloses in paragraphs [0034-0035] wherein the at least one venting mechanism incorporates a dump valve 30, the dump valve is movable between an open condition wherein it is energized and wherein the air in the brake pipe can be vented, and a closed condition wherein it is de-energized and the ECP is in its normal operational condition whereby the brake pipe is closed at the end thereof, but is silent with regards to the energization/de-energization being controlled by a solenoid.
Hart et al. teach in col. 2 lines 40-48 the use of a dump valve in the environment of a rail vehicle being controlled by a solenoid.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the dump valve of Backes III et al., to have been controlled by a solenoid, in view of the teachings of Hart et al., in order to provide a fluid control system that is marked by simple operation, easy network connectivity, and quick control response times.
Re: claim 14. Backes III et al., as modified, teaches in paragraph [0053] of Backers III et al. the limitation wherein the dump valve and/or the brake activation unit comprises a visual indicator which is activated upon the brake activation unit being activated to vent the air from the brake pipe.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Backes III et al. in view of US Patent 5941280 to Hart et al. as applied above, and further in view of Fugiel.
Backes III et al. include a brake activation unit 16 that is capable of being removed with sufficient force as broadly recited, but are silent with regards to the brake activation unit being incorporated in an end of train unit.
Fugiel teaches in figure 1A the sensor portion 18 of a brake activation unit of a rail vehicle being incorporated in an end of train unit 14.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake activation unit of Backes III et al., as modified, to have been incorporated in an end of train unit, in view of the teachings of Fugiel, in order to provide a means of measuring the pressure at the end of the brake line to be able to effectively control pressure supply to compensate for pressure loss along the way to the end of the brake line. Examiner notes that the combination would result in the dump valve, which forms a part of the brake activation unit, discharging through the end thereof since the brake activation unit is placed at the end thereof.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/7/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on pgs. 10-13 that Backes fails to disclose various recitations. Examiner disagrees and directs Applicant to the rejections using Backes alone or as modified as set forth above. Examiner notes that according to MPEP 714.02 the reply by Applicant must specifically point out the supposed errors in the Examiner’s action. In the instant reply, Applicant merely states that Backes does not disclose various recitations without particularly pointing out the supposed errors in Examiner’s action. Accordingly, the above rejections have been maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY M BURCH whose telephone number is (571)272-7114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30AM-3PM, generally.
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.
mmb
January 23, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616