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 Amendment
The amendment filed 12/08/2025 has been entered. Claims 13, 23 have been amended, claim 20 has been cancelled and new claim 25 has been added. Therefore, claims 13-19 and 21-25 are now pending in the application.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 13-16, 18-19, 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui; Takuya (US – 2010/0101900 A1) and further in view of Chelaidite et al. (US – 2018/0045255 A1).
As per claim 13, Usui discloses Electric Brake comprising:
a brake actuator (60, Fig: 1-14) having a power transmission for transmitting an actuating force to a brake pad (The caliper 4 is also provided with an actuator 60 adapted to switch an operation of the parking brake mechanism 25 between a locking action and an unlocking action by selectively supplying currents of different polarities to the parking brake mechanism 25 for a short period of time, 0043], Fig: 1), said power transmission including a rotatable shaft (44, Fig: 1);
a coupler (50, [0047], Fig: 1-4) with a locking element (54, Fig; 1-4), wherein the coupler is controllable so that the locking element is engaged with the rotatable shaft and blocks rotation of the rotatable shaft or so that the locking element is disengaged from the rotatable shaft so that the rotatable shaft is rotatable (pawl 54 can either lock or release the rotor, [0066], [0070], Fig: 1-4), wherein
the brake actuator (60) comprises an interface (64, Fig: 1-4) configured to be connected to the locking element (54) and to engage or disengage the locking element from the rotatable shaft (44, Operation for Applying the Normal Brake, Operation for Releasing the Normal Brake, Operation for Releasing the Parking Brake, and Operation for Manually Releasing the Parking Brake, [0051] – [0075], Fig: 1-4),.
Usui discloses all the structural elements of the claimed invention but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the locking element has a disc-shape with one or more grooves or openings permitting engagement of an interface component to axially shift the locking element.
Chelaidite discloses Parking Brake Torque Locking Mechanism comprising:
wherein the locking element has a disc-shape with one or more grooves or openings permitting engagement of an interface component to axially shift the locking element (the torque locking mechanism 28 includes a rotor 56 that is rotationally fixed to the motor shaft 48 of the motor 26, but axially moveably along an axis 58 of the motor shaft 48. The torque locking mechanism 28 includes an electromagnet 61 comprising a core 60 and an electrical coil 64 that is in electrical communication with a power source via an electrical connection 66. The core 60 is rigidly attached to a housing 30 (of FIG. 1 or FIG. 2, for example) so that the electromagnet 61 is restricted from moving and rotating. The torque locking mechanism 28 also includes a permanent magnet 62 and a friction disc 68 located between the rotor 56 and the electromagnet 61. The torque locking mechanism 28 includes a bonnet 65 that is adapted to maintain a position of the permanent magnet 62 and electrical coil 64 relative to the core 60. More specifically, the bonnet 65 comprises a center bore 67 adapted to support the permanent magnet 62 and a channel 69 disposed around the center bore 67 for supporting the coil 64, [0067], Fig: 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Electric Brake of the Usui to make the locking element has a disc-shape with one or more grooves or openings permitting engagement of an interface component to axially shift the locking element as taught by Chelaidite in order to prevent back driving of one or more rotary to linear stage mechanisms after the motor or MGU is turned OFF to prevent the clamp force from being prematurely reduced or eliminated.
As per claim 14, Usui discloses wherein
the interface comprises an interface component (pushing tool 122, 122B, and 122B1, Fig: 1-13) that is configured to be pulled or pushed to disengage the locking element from the rotatable shaft (Operation for Manually Releasing the Parking Brake, [0071] – [0074], Fig: 1-13).
As per claim 15, Usui discloses wherein
the interface comprises a sealed connection through which the interface component is accessible (water tight bolt 121, [0072], [0074], Fig: 1-10).
As per claim 16, Usui discloses wherein
the rotatable shaft comprises a rotating member in the form of a disk (237, 239, [0107] – [0108], Fig: 15).
As per claim 18, Usui discloses a first receptacle into which a tool element is insertable so that the tool member engages the rotatable shaft and transmits a rotation on the rotatable shaft (bolt hole 120, The tool 122 is inserted through the bolt hole 120 until the tool forward end portion 124 abuts against the lower surface 66a of the pin 68, [0072], Fig: 2-7).
As per claim 19, Chelaidite further discloses wherein the locking element is arranged on the coupler so that the locking element is movable so that one side of the locking element is engageable with one side of the rotating member to block rotation of the rotating member and is disengagable from said one side of the rotating member to allow rotation of the rotating member ([0067], Fig: 5-6).
As per claim 21, Usui discloses wherein
the power transmission is electrically driven and causes a rotational movement of the rotatable shaft (motor 21 and 211, Fig: 1, 15).
As per claim 22, Usui discloses wherein
the coupler is arranged in an electromagnetic parking brake locking mechanism for locking the brake actuator (permanent magnet 66, coil 7, Fig: 2).
As per claim 23, Usui discloses Electric Brake comprising:
using an interface (64, Fig: 1-2) of a brake actuator (60, Fig: 1-2) to insert an interface component (pushing tool 122, 122B, 122B1, Fig: 1-13) into a locking element of the brake actuator, the locking element locking movement of the brake actuator (Operation for Manually Releasing the Parking Brake, [0071] – [0074], Fig: 1-13)
disengaging, by way of the interface component, the locking element from a rotatable shaft of the brake actuator (Operation for Applying the Normal Brake, Operation for releasing the Normal Brake, Operation for Releasing the Parking Brake and Operation for Manually Releasing the Parking Brake, [0051] – [0075], Fig: 1- 4); and
moving a tool element to transmit power to the rotatable shaft to release the brake, (Operation for Applying the Normal Brake, Operation for releasing the Normal Brake, Operation for Releasing the Parking Brake and Operation for Manually Releasing the Parking Brake, [0051] – [0075], Fig: 1- 4).
Usui discloses all the structural elements of the claimed invention but fails to explicitly disclose brake actuator having a disc-shape with one or more grooves or openings permitting engagement of the interface component to axially shift the locking element.
Chelaidite discloses Parking Brake Torque Locking Mechanism comprising:
wherein the locking element has a disc-shape with one or more grooves or openings permitting engagement of an interface component to axially shift the locking element (the torque locking mechanism 28 includes a rotor 56 that is rotationally fixed to the motor shaft 48 of the motor 26, but axially moveably along an axis 58 of the motor shaft 48. The torque locking mechanism 28 includes an electromagnet 61 comprising a core 60 and an electrical coil 64 that is in electrical communication with a power source via an electrical connection 66. The core 60 is rigidly attached to a housing 30 (of FIG. 1 or FIG. 2, for example) so that the electromagnet 61 is restricted from moving and rotating. The torque locking mechanism 28 also includes a permanent magnet 62 and a friction disc 68 located between the rotor 56 and the electromagnet 61. The torque locking mechanism 28 includes a bonnet 65 that is adapted to maintain a position of the permanent magnet 62 and electrical coil 64 relative to the core 60. More specifically, the bonnet 65 comprises a center bore 67 adapted to support the permanent magnet 62 and a channel 69 disposed around the center bore 67 for supporting the coil 64, [0067], Fig: 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Electric Brake of the Usui to make the locking element has a disc-shape with one or more grooves or openings permitting engagement of an interface component to axially shift the locking element as taught by Chelaidite in order to prevent back driving of one or more rotary to linear stage mechanisms after the motor or MGU is turned OFF to prevent the clamp force from being prematurely reduced or eliminated.
As per claim 24, Usui discloses turning the tool element (pushing tool 122, 122B, 122B1, Fig: 1-13} to release torque applied by the rotatable shaft to the locking element in the state of the locked brake before disengaging the locking element from the rotatable shaft (bolt 151is rotated, [0091] – [0095], Fig: 11-13).
As per claim 25, Chelaidite further discloses wherein the brake actuator is configured such that residual torque applied by the rotatable shaft to the locking element is releasable prior to disengagement of the locking element, and wherein the interface and the tool element cooperate to release the torque on the locking element before the locking element is axially shifted ([0067], Fig: 5-6).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui; Takuya (US – 2010/0101900 A1) as modified by Chelaidite et al. (US – 2018/0045255 A1) as applied to claims 13 and 16 above, and further in view of Fuderer Erich (EP – 1386812 A1, from IDS, Examiner disclosed English machined translation in previous office action).
As per claim 17, Usui as modified by Chelaidite discloses all the structural elements of the claimed invention but fails to explicitly disclose wherein
the coupler comprises a spring for moving the locking element to a position in which the locking element engages one side of the rotating member.
Fuderer discloses Spring Brake Cylinder For Vehicle Brake comprising:
the coupler comprises a spring (27, Fig: 1, 4-5) for moving the locking element to a position in which the locking element engages one side of the rotating member, ([0030] – [0032], Fig: 1, 4-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Electric Brake of the Usui as modified by Chelaidite as taught by make the coupler comprises a spring for moving the locking element to a position in which the locking element engages one side of the rotating member as taught by Fuderer in order to provide simple means a hose brake and resulting rapid pressure drop reliable recorded and avoids a collapse of spring brake.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARK, filed 12/08/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3-19 and 21-24 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Usui; Takuya (US – 2010/0101900 A1) and further in view of Chelaidite et al. (US – 2018/0045255 A1) and Fuderer Erich (EP – 1386812 A1, from IDS).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAN M AUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-5792. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:30 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.
/SAN M AUNG/Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616