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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/21/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Otremba (US# 2019/0337503).
Otremba discloses a method of operating a brake system, the brake system comprising: a control system 110/120/140, an operator input device and a plurality of brakes 1-4; and a brake valve assembly comprising a first channel A comprising a first operator brake valve 24, a first automatic brake valve 25A and a first control valve 21a fluidly connected to at least one first brake 1-2 of the plurality of brakes and the first operator 24 and automatic 25A brake valves, wherein the first control valve 21a is configurable by the control system communicating a first control signal to the first control valve [0030]; and a second channel B comprising a second operator brake valve 24, a second automatic brake valve 25B, and a second control valve 21b fluidly connected to at least one second brake 3-4 of the plurality of brakes and the second operator 24 and automatic 25B brake valves, wherein the second control valve 21b is configurable by the control system communicating a second control signal to the second control valve [0030], the method comprising: determining, by the control system, whether to implement an operator braking mode [0073] or an automatic braking mode [0064][0071]; and implementing the operator braking mode by: maintaining the first and/or second control valve 21a/b in an operator brake configuration to fluidly connect the first and/or second operator brake valve 24 to the at least one first and/or second brake [0073]; and receiving an input at the operator input device to control the first and/or second operator brake valve 24 and thereby control the at least one first and/or second brake; or implementing the automatic braking mode by: maintaining the first and/or second control valve 21a/b in an automatic brake configuration to fluidly connect the first and/or second automatic brake valve 25 to the at least one first and/or second brake; and automatically controlling, by the control system, the first and/or second automatic brake valve 25 and thereby control the at least one first and/or second brake, and controlling, by the control system, the first and second channel independently of one another by controlling the first control valve and/or the first automatic brake valve independently of the second control valve and/or the second automatic brake valve. [0013][0058]
Regarding claim 15, the method comprises implementing the automatic braking mode during the operator braking mode and whilst the input is being received at the operator input device [0043][0076].
Regarding claim 16, in the automatic brake configuration (operation where pA2/pB2 is greater than pA1/pA2) the at least one first and/or second brake is controllable by the first 25A and/or second 25B automatic brake valve independently of an input to the operator input device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4-11 and 13 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-11 and 13.
Regarding claim 14, Applicant argues that “Otremba discloses that braking pressures "can be specified for the service brakes 1, 2, 3, 4 on the front axle VA and the rear axle HA by means of the two shuttle valves 21A, 21B pneumatically independently of each other." Otremba, paragraph [0058]. However, this independence is a passive pneumatic result of the shuttle valves, not the control system controlling one channel independently of the other. Each shuttle valve passes through "the higher of the two brake valve-relay valve control pressures pA1 or pA2." Otremba, paragraph [0057].” [0030] suggests 3/2 valves in place of the shuttle valves which require active control, not the passive pneumatic control argued by Applicant. It is also noted that valves 21A and 21B are independent of each other and are electrically controlled in response to the higher of the two pressures at the valve. Applicant further argues that the second brake valve is controlled by a single demand signal S2. This does not preclude independent control. [0065] specifically states “2-channel proportionality valve 25 can be provided, which can produce the second brake valve-relay valve control pressure pA2 and the second brake valve-axle modulator control pressure pB2 pneumatically independently of each other”. Applicant further argues that channel-differential operation in Otremba thus arises from an electronics failure rather than from control-system control of each channel. It is not clear from Applicant’s arguments why this is not independent control. If the controller can operate one channel without the other, then the controller is capable of controlling the channels independently of one another.
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