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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species C in the reply filed on October 8, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the examiner’s separation of Species B and Species C is incorrect and should be treated as the same species and that all pending claims are directed to a single inventive concept and should be treated as such.
Regarding the separation of Species B and C in the election requirement, the examiner agrees with applicant’s remarks. Thus, Species B and C should be grouped together as one collective Species.
Regarding applicant’s assertion that all pending claims are directed to a single inventive concept, here, Species A and D-F all disclose different types of VCM brake systems being used with different types of brake modules, each containing their own unique structural features. Thus, at least these Species are still present in the invention and the election requirement is still maintained regarding their divergent subject matter.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 62 and 66-75 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on October 8, 2025.
Note: Applicant contends that Claims 72-75 read on the elected Species C embodiment. However, contrary to applicant’s remarks, independent Claim 72 is not a generic claim. Claims 72-75 relate to a method of detaching the VCM from the vehicle platform and then servicing the VCM, i.e., by attaching a replacement VCM. This method does not read on the elected method of Species C of operating a VCM based brake system and thus these Claims have not been examined.
Claim Objections
Claim 61 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 11 of the claim, the word “withing” should read –within--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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) 61 and 63-65 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 9,102,331 to Bluethmann et al in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,030,055 to Schubert.
Regarding Claim 61, Bluethmann et al disclose a method of operating a Vehicle Corner Module (VCM) – based brake system 20 including at least one control circuit 50B and a brake actuator 5 (see column 5 lines 1-18), the VCM-based brake system 20 being mounted within a VCM 40 connectable to a vehicle platform 10 (see Figures 3 and 4), the method comprising most all the features of the instant invention including: at the control circuit 50B, obtaining a measure wheel rotation rate of a wheel 18 mounted onto the VCM 40, at the control circuit 50B, obtaining a target wheel rotation rate for the wheel 18, comparing the measured wheel rotation rate to the target wheel rotation rate, in response to identifying that the actual wheel rotation rate is higher than the target wheel rotation rate, activating the brake actuator 5, in response to identifying that the actual wheel rotation rate is equal or lower than the target wheel rotation rate, deactivating the brake actuator 5 of the VCM-based brake system (see column 2 lines 30-38, column 3 lines 1-18, column 6 lines 22-34, and Figure 4), and wherein the VCM-based system 20 is airtight within the VCM 40 such that there is no brake communication between the VCM 40 and the vehicle platform 10 during the activating and deactivating (as implied in column 10 lines 18-36, as VCM 40 is separate from the vehicle frame/platform).
However, Bluethmann et al do not disclose that the brake actuator is fluid based and activated by pressurized fluid provided in a fluid reservoir so that the VCM system is fluid tight within the VCM with no brake fluid communication between the VCM and the platform.
Schubert teaches a fluid-based brake power source 1 mechanically and fluidly connected to a brake actuator 5 and adapted to provide brake fluid for operating the brake actuator, the system includes a brake fluid source 2 storing the brake fluid, and a fluid pump 1a is disposed downstream of the brake fluid source, the pump is in fluid communication with the brake fluid source 2 and with the brake actuator 5; a brake modulator 3/4 (i.e. inlet and outlet valves) is in fluid communication with the brake actuator 5, the brake modulator is adapted to regulate flow of the brake fluid between the brake actuator, the brake fluid source, and the fluid pump.
This type of system is functionally equivalent to the electro-mechanical system of Bluethmann et al. and would have easily replaced the electromechanical system, as both regulate the rotation rate of the wheel, and would have resulted in a brake actuator, brake power source, brake modulator, and brake control circuit located between the wheel and platform as a single unit.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have replaced the electro-mechanical brake system of Bluethmann et al. with a fluid-based power source of the type taught by Schubert, as both would have yielded the same expectant result of providing a means of regulating the wheel speed based upon various road conditions.
Regarding Claim 63, Bluethmann et al., as modified, further disclose that the VCM-based brake system comprises pumping a pressurized fluid by a fluid pump 1a from the reservoir 2 toward the brake actuator 5 via a fluid line adapted to provide fluid communication between the fluid pump 1a and the brake actuator 5 (see column 2 lines 44 et al of Schubert).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the modified system of Bluethmann et al with the fluid pump control taught by Schubert, thus regulating the fluid pressure applied to the brake actuator to the specified or requested amount.
Regarding Claim 64, Bluethmann et al., as modified, further disclose that the VCM-based brake system further comprises at least one valve 3 or 4 disposed along the fluid line, and wherein activating the brake actuator 5 comprises setting the at least one valve 3 or 4 to a position in which the fluid pump 1a and the brake actuator 5 are in fluid communication, allowing pressure build-up at the brake actuator 5 (see column 3 lines 3-10 of Schubert).
Note: This provides a means of modulating fluid pressure within the brake actuator, as is common in the art.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the modified system of Bluethmann et al with the valve control taught by Schubert, thus regulating the fluid pressure applied the brake actuator to the specified or requested amount.
Regarding Claim 65, Bluethmann et al., as modified, further disclose measuring a fluid pressure within the brake actuator 5 and based on the measured fluid pressure, operating the fluid pump 1a to regulate the fluid pressure within the brake actuator 5 (see column 3 lines 3-10 of Schubert).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the modified system of Bluethmann et al with a means to sense pressure within the brake actuator to operate the fluid pump to regulate fluid pressure within the brake actuator as taught by Schubert, to better monitor the available fluid pressure within the VCM-based brake system to always ensure adequate braking to the vehicle is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PG Publication No. 2018/0043869 to Tanimoto and U.S. Patent No. 11,465,699 to Sardes et al both disclose methods of operating fluid-based Vehicle Corner Module based brake systems similar to applicant’s.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 AM - 5 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.
PAMELA RODRIGUEZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/PAMELA RODRIGUEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 10/28/25