DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/5/26 has been entered.
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) 1-3, 6-14, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB-2509933 (GB’933) in view of US Patent Application 2019/0112037 to Meinel Cheesman.
Re: claims 1 and 16. GB’933 shows in figures 1 and 2 a vehicle, including: a wheel W; a brake assembly B having a portion selectively engageable with the wheel to reduce the rate of rotation of the wheel or stop rotation of the wheel; a HVAC unit or cooling system 1 providing an output air flow; an air circuit 3 in which the output air flow is directed, and wherein the air circuit includes a first outlet 7 through which at least a portion of the output air flow is directed toward at least part of the brake assembly B under at least some conditions of vehicle operation including when the vehicle is moving as disclosed on pg. 6 lines 20-23; and a passenger compartment a portion of which shown in the upper righthand corner of figure 1 of the motor vehicle, and wherein the air circuit includes a second outlet 5, but is silent with regard to the second outlet being communicated with the passenger compartment to provide at least part of the output air flow into the passenger compartment under at least some conditions of vehicle operation.
Meinel Cheesman teaches in paragraph [0010] the use of an outlet being communicated with a passenger compartment to provide at least part of an output airflow into the passenger compartment under at least some conditions of vehicle operation.
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 air circuit of GB’933 to have included an outlet communicated with the passenger compartment of the vehicle, in view of the teaching of Meinel Cheesman, in order to provide a means of recycling the cooled air already associated with the vehicle system by using the same cooled air to cool both the brakes and the passenger compartment and preventing the useful cool air from escaping the environment of the vehicle for improved efficiency.
Re: claim 2. GB’933 is silent with regard to the HVAC unit specifically being an air conditioner.
Meinel Cheesman teaches in the first three lines of the abstract the use of an air conditioning system or air conditioner.
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 HVAC unit of GB’933, as modified, to have specifically been an air conditioner, in view of the teachings of Meinel Cheesman, in order to provide cooled air to cool the brakes to prevent them from overheating and to provide cooled air to the passenger compartment to provide a comfortable environment for passengers.
Re: claim 3. GB’933, as modified, teaches in figures 1 and 2 and on pg. 2 lines 22-35 of GB’933 a valve associated with the air circuit 3, the valve having multiple positions and, when the valve is in at least one of the multiple positions, at least a portion of the output air flow does flow through the first outlet.
Re: claims 6-8, 10, and 16. GB’933, as modified, teaches on pg. 7 lines 23-37 of GB’933 the limitation wherein at least a portion of the output airflow is not directed at the brake assembly in at least one position of the valve. Examiner notes that the combination results in the airflow in the second outlet being provided to the passenger compartment as modified. With regard to claim 10, see pg. 2 lines 22-26 of GB’933.
Re: claim 9. GB’933, as modified, teaches in figures 1-2 the limitation wherein the valve 17 is located between the first outlet 7 and the second outlet 5.
Re: claims 11-14. GB’933, as modified, teaches on pg. 7 lines 16-21 of GB’933 the limitation wherein a controller is coupled to the valve to control when the valve is in the first and second positions. Examiner notes that the reference to measured temperature refers to a temperature sensing means.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB-2509933 (GB’933) in view of US Patent Application 2019/0112037 to Meinel Cheesman as applied above, and further in view of BR-P10722350 (BR’350).
Re: claim 5. GB’933, as modified, discloses on pg. 2 line 10 the use of a brake assembly including a disc brake/caliper, but is silent with specifically describing a rotor and a brake pad and the airflow specifically being directed to the rotor.
BR’350 teaches in figures 1A and 1B wherein the brake assembly 24 includes a rotor 26 and a brake pad 22 that is selectively engageable with the rotor and wherein when the output air flow flows through the first outlet, the output air flow is directed at the rotor 26 as shown in figure 1B.
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 disc brake of GB’933, as modified, to have specifically included a pad and rotor and to have the airflow directed at the rotor, in view of the teachings of BR’350, in order to provide brake system components that result in strong stopping power with excellent heat dissipation and to provide a means of cooling the rotor to help prevent it from warping prematurely.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB’933 in view of Meinel Cheesman as applied above, and further in view of CN-1959160 (CN'160).
GB’933, as modified, is silent with regards to the vehicle including a switch.
CN'160 teaches in paragraph [0010] the use of a switch serving as a valve position switch.
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 vehicle of GB’933, as modified, to have included a switch serving as a valve position switch, in view of the teachings of CN'160, in order to provide a means of regulating the airflow to cool the brake and/or other components selectively while providing added benefits of safety, redundancy, and fault protection. The combination would result in the switch having multiple states controlling the position of the valve.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection do not rely on the combination of reference used in the prior Office action.
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 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.
mmb
March 7, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616