7Notice 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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim incorporates subject matter from the Abstract of the disclosure. Applicant is required to delete the abstract language from claim 20 and present the claim in proper format. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 4 , 6, 9 – 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by G. Bakonyi-Kiss and Z. Szucs, "Low cost, low power, intelligent brake temperature sensor system for automotive applications," , hereafter “Bakonyi-Kiss”.
As per claim 1 Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
A brake monitoring apparatus for a vehicle comprising: a plurality of temperature sensors configured to measure the temperature of each of a plurality of brakes located on a vehicle during use (see pg. 2, section II, 1st – 3rd paragraphs);
wherein each sensor has a corresponding wire; the wire having first and second ends; the first end of the wire for communicative coupling to one of the plurality of temperature sensors, the second end being communicatively coupled to an electronic unit (see pg. 2, Fig. 2);
the electronic control unit comprising a processor and memory (pg. 2, section A., 1st paragraph),
the electronic control unit being communicatively coupled to a visual display, wherein the plurality of temperature sensors send power signals to the electronic control unit which converts and sends temperature values of any one of the plurality of brakes for viewing during operation on said visual display (pg. 2, section A., 1st – 2nd paragraphs);
further wherein said plurality of temperature sensors send power signals to said electronic control unit where said electronic control unit converts said power signals with said processor or an application specific analog circuit to a respective temperature value for each brake; yet further wherein each temperature value for each brake is compared in the electronic control unit comprising a database with a selective threshold temperature assigned to each brake such that when one or more temperature values exceed said threshold temperature (pg. 2, section A., 4th paragraph),
a notice is transmitted to said display indicating the brake and that the temperature threshold that has been exceeded (pg. 2, section A., 1st – 2nd paragraphs).
Bakonyi-Kiss teaches all the limitations of the claim. Therefore, claim 1 is anticipated by Bakonyi-Kiss.
As per claim 2, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
The brake monitoring apparatus of claim 1, wherein the temperature threshold range is 450 degrees F-900 degrees F. The reference teaches that the temperature system is capable of measuring brake temperature in the wide interval of -40°C to +800°C, which includes the claimed range. (see pg. 1, Section I, 1st paragraph)
As per claim 3, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
The brake monitoring apparatus of claim 1, wherein the temperature sensor comprises a thermocouple. The reference teaches that the temperature sensors are thermocouple-based gradient sensors. (pg. 2, Section I, 1st paragraph)
As per claim 4, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
The brake monitoring apparatus of claim 3, wherein the brakes comprise drum brakes and wherein the thermocouple is coupled to a backing plate of a brake shoe of any one of the plurality of drum brakes. The reference teaches that the electrical control unit is on the control panel while the sensors are mounted on the brake shoe of the wheels. (pg. 2, Section II, 1st paragraph)
As per claim 6, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
The brake monitoring apparatus of claim 3, wherein the thermocouple comprises a K-type thermocouple. The reference teaches that K-type thermocouples are used to measure brake temperatures in range of -40°C to +800°C, and their interval is 200°C to 1200°C. (pg. 1, Section I, 7th paragraph)
As per claim 9, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
The brake system of claim 1, wherein the temperature sensor comprises an infrared sensor. The reference teaches that infrared (IR) cameras are another common way of measuring brake temperatures, along with thermocouples. (pg. 1, Section I, 6th paragraph)
As per claim 10 Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
A method of temperature monitoring for a brake system comprising the steps of:assigning a temperature range as a target temperature range on a brake monitoring system (pg. 1, Section I, 3rd paragraph);
the brake monitoring system comprising a plurality of brakes a plurality of temperature sensors configured to measure the temperature of each of the plurality of brakes (pg. 2, section II, 1st paragraph),
wherein each sensor has a corresponding wire, the wire having first and second ends, the first end of the wire being coupled to the sensor, the second end being coupled to an electronic control unit comprising a processor and memory (pg. 2, section A., 1st paragraph),
the processor being coupled to a visual display (pg. 2, section A., 1st – 2nd paragraphs);
identifying the temperature sensor input as a received temperature based upon the temperature sensor input responsive to receiving a temperature sensor input to the brake monitoring system (pg.2 section B, 1st – 2nd paragraphs);
matching the received temperature to the target temperature range; generating a first signal responsive to matching the target temperature range to the received temperature; and generating a second signal responsive to exceeding the target temperature range to the received temperature (pg. 3, section B, 3rd – 4th paragraphs).
Bakonyi-Kiss teaches all the limitations of claim. Therefore, claim 10 is anticipated by Bakonyi-Kiss.
As per claim 11, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
The method of operating a brake system of claim 10, wherein the target temperature range is 450 degrees F-900 degrees F. The reference teaches using K-type thermocouples with a range of -40°C to +800°C, equivalent to approximately -40°F to 1472°F, which encompasses the claimed range. (pg. 1, Section I, 7th paragraph)
As per claim 14, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
The method of operating a brake system of claim 10 further comprising the step of:responsive to failing to match the target temperature range to the received temperature, measuring a received temperature after a predetermined passage of time. The reference teaches a digital thermometer chip (DS1621) that sends digitalized temperature data to the microcontroller via its Two Wire Interface, temperature data is gathered and sent for data processing. (pg. 3, section B, 3rd – 4th paragraphs)
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Krystos (US 5,939,978 - hereafter, “Krystos”.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites “The brake monitoring apparatus of claim 4, wherein the thermocouple is coupled to the brake shoe of any of the plurality of drum brakes at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said brake shoe.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a brake apparatus capable of measuring brake temperatures using thermocouple sensors integrated in every wheel of the vehicle. However, it does not teach that the thermocouple is coupled to the brake shoe of a drum brake at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said brake shoe.
Krystos teaches a drum brake system 10 including a cylindrical brake drum 12 (Fig. 1, col. 2, lines 65 – 67). It further teaches that a first temperature sensor 38 is located at a distance X from the wear surface 32 of the brake lining 26, where the distance X is based on the remaining useful thickness of the brake lining 26 mounted on the backing plate 28 (Fig. 3; col. 3, lines 54 – 67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bakonyi-Kiss to include placement of the thermocouple within the brake shoe of a drum brake at a defined depth, as taught by Krystos in order to improve brake wear detection and thermal accuracy by ensuring a consistent reference depth for sensing thermal load near the friction interference.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss -4 in view of Krystos and Shimura (US 2008/0018445 – hereafter, “Shimura”.
Regarding claim 7, the claim recites “The brake monitoring apparatus of claim 3, wherein the brakes comprise disk brakes and wherein the thermocouple is coupled to a brake lining at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said disk brake.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a brake monitoring system that includes thermocouple sensors integrated in every wheel of the vehicle. However, it does not teach that the thermocouple is coupled to the brake shoe of a drum brake at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into the disk brake.
However, Krystos teaches a drum brake system 10 having a first temperature sensor 38 is located at a distance X from the wear surface 32 of the brake lining 26, where the distance X is based on the remaining useful thickness of the brake lining 26 mounted on the backing plate 28 (Fig. 3; col. 3, lines 54 – 67), but does not teach sensor placement of an air brake.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bakonyi-Kiss in view Krystos in order to incorporate depth-based thermocouple placement within the brake lining, thereby enhancing sensor accuracy more reliable brake condition tracking. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Krystos does not teach depth-based thermocouple placement within the brake lining and sensor placement of an air brake.
However, Shimura teaches that in a disk brake system, during braking, a piston actuates to move the brake pad into contact with the disk (see para [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Krytos to use disk brakes as taught in Shimura to improve thermal accuracy and wear prediction in disk brake systems.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot (US 10,099,672 – hereafter, “Hoefsloot”) and Krystos
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites “The brake monitoring apparatus of claim 3, wherein the brakes comprise air brakes and wherein the thermocouple is coupled to a brake shoe at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said air brake.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a brake monitoring system that includes thermocouple sensors integrated in every wheel of the vehicle. However, it does not teach the brakes comprise air brakes and that the thermocouple is coupled to a brake shoe at a depth of 3/8 of an inch.
However, Hoefloost teaches an air brake system comprising axle-mounted brakes, including a first axle brake A1 and a right and left first axle wheel brake A11 (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakonyi-Kiss with Hoefsloot in order to adapt the thermocouple-based monitoring system of Bakonyi-Kiss for use with air brake systems, thereby enabling reliable thermal monitoring and providing driver alerts when overheating conditions occur in heavy-duty vehicles.
Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot does not teach placement of the thermocouple at a defined depth within the brake lining of a brake shoe.
However, Krystos teaches sensor placement within brake lining of a drum brake system at a defined depth from the wear surface (Fig. 3, col. 3., lines 54 – 67), but does not teach sensor placement of an air brake.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to to modify Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefloost with Krystos’ because it teaches sensor placement within the brake lining of a drum brake system at a defined depth from the wear surface in order to enable more accurate thermal profiling under heavy load vehicle braking.
Claims 12, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Cremona et. al. (US 10, 767,717 – hereafter, “Cremona”.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “The method of operating a brake system of claim 10, further comprising the step of:projecting an audio notification.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a method of operating a brake system comprising temperature sensors capable of measuring brake temperature in the wide interval of -40°C to +800°C, but does not disclose a feature projecting an audio notification.
However, Cremona teaches that the brake monitoring system may alert the driver to potential brake conditions through audible or visual means (see col. 4, lines 30 – 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bakonyi-Kiss to include the step of projecting audio notification as taught by Cremona in order to enhance vehicle safety and responsiveness during abnormal brake temperature conditions.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites “The method of operating a brake system of claim 10, further comprising the step of: displaying a visual notification.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a method of operating a brake system comprising temperature sensors capable of measuring brake temperature in the wide interval of -40°C to +800°C, but does not disclose a feature projecting a video notification.
However, Cremona teaches that the brake monitoring system may alert the driver to potential brake conditions through audible or visual means (see col. 4, lines 30 – 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bakonyi-Kiss to include the step of displaying a visual notification as taught by Cremona in order to enhance vehicle safety and responsiveness during abnormal brake temperature conditions.
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites “The method of operating a brake system of claim 10, further comprising the step of:displaying a visual notification.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a system for measuring brake temperature in each wheel using thermocouple-based gradient sensors, but does not disclose storing the received temperature in system memory.
Cremona teaches a control logic including memory (RAM, ROM, EEPROM, and variants) suitable for storing executable instructions and systems data, including temperature values (see col. 2, lines 30 – 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate system memory into the method of Bakonyi-Kiss to store the received brake temperature data as taught by Cremona in order to allow for historical logging, diagnostics and intelligent control.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot
As per claim 16, Bakonyi-Kiss teaches the following:
A brake monitoring system for a vehicle comprising :a plurality of brakes (pg. 2, 1st paragraph, Fig. 2);
a vehicle electronic control unit comprising a processor having memory (pg. 2, Section A, 1st paragraph);
a vehicle visual display (pg. 2, section A.,1st – 2nd paragraphs);
and a plurality of thermocouples configured to measure the temperature of each of the plurality of brakes, wherein each thermocouple comprises a wire having first and second ends, the first end of the thermocouple wire being communicatively coupled to one of the plurality of brakes on an embedding surface of said brakes, the second end communicatively coupled to said vehicle electronic control unit (pg. 2, Fig. 2),
each thermocouple receives a measured temperature of a corresponding one of said plurality of brakes and transmits said measured temperature through the thermocouple to the vehicle electronic control unit (pg. 2, Section A, 1st – 2nd paragraphs).
However, Bakonyi-Kiss does not teach a selectively programmable temperature threshold for the electronic control unit, a visual notification triggered by the threshold, or that the electronic control unit communicates a notification via the display when said threshold is exceeded.
Hoefloost teaches a brake control system that includes a processor, memory, and logic capable of comparing sensed temperature values to predefined programmable threshold value (Fig. 1, col. 5, lines 30 – 45). It is further taught that when the measured temperature exceeds the threshold, a notification signal is generated and displayed to the driver, via on a screen or warning indicator (col. 5, lines 45 – 55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bakonyi-Kiss to include the programmable threshold comparison and driver notification features taught by Hoofloost in order to provide early warning and real-time feedback regarding overheating conditions, enhancing safety and improving system responsiveness in commercial and heavy-duty vehicles.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot further in view of Cremona.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites “The brake monitoring system of claim 16, wherein the brake monitoring system further comprises a trailer electronic control unit comprising a processor having memory, and wherein said truck visual display receives a trailer brake temperature from the trailer electronic control unit and communicates said temperature to said truck visual display.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a brake monitoring system installed at each wheel. Additionally, Hoefsloot teaches programmable threshold comparison and driver notifications. (Fig. 1, col. 5, lines 30 – 45), but does not teach a trailer electronic unit with a processor and memory that communicates temperature data to a truck display.
Cremona however teaches a trailer electronic control unit with brake monitoring control logic that may include a processor and memory for storing and executing instructions. (see Col. 2 lines 30-40)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bakonyi-Kiss with the trailer control unit of Cremona and the programmable threshold and driver notification system of Hoefsloot, in order to extend trailer-specific brake monitoring integration while providing threshold triggered driver alerts to improve safety and real-time visibility of trailer brake conditions.
Claims 18, and 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot) further in view of Krystos.
Regarding claim 18, the claim recites “The brake monitoring system of claim 16, wherein the thermocouple is coupled to the brake shoe of any of the plurality of drum brakes at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said brake shoe.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a brake monitoring system that includes thermocouple sensors integrated in every wheel of the vehicle. Hoefsloot further teaches programmable threshold comparison and driver notification features. (Fig. 1, col. 5, lines 30 – 45). However, it does not teach that the thermocouple is coupled to the brake shoe of a drum brake at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said brake shoe.
Krystos teaches a drum brake system 10 having a first temperature sensor 38 is located at a distance X from the wear surface 32 of the brake lining 26, where the distance X is based on the remaining useful thickness of the brake lining 26 mounted on the backing plate 28 (Fig. 3; col. 3, lines 54 – 67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot with the depth-based thermocouple placement of Krystos, in order to improve sensor accuracy within the brake shoe of a drum brake while ensuring overheating conditions are detected and communicated to the driver through threshold-based alerts.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “The brake monitoring system of claim 16, wherein the brakes comprise air brakes and wherein the thermocouple is coupled to a brake shoe at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said brake shoe.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a brake monitoring system that includes thermocouple sensors integrated in every wheel of the vehicle. Hoefsloot teaches a braking system with air brakes located on the first axle and a left axle and right first axle wheel brake A11 (Fig. 1). Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot does not teach the brakes comprise air brakes and that the thermocouple is coupled to a brake shoe at a depth of 3/8 of an inch.
However, Krystos teaches sensor placement within brake lining of a drum brake system at a defined depth from the wear surface (Fig. 3, col. 3., lines 54 – 67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot with the air brake system of Krystos, in order to adapt thermocouple monitoring for air brake applications while ensuring threshold triggered notifications are provided to the driver for reliable, real-time monitoring in heavy-duty brake systems.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over using G. Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot, further in view of Shimura and Krystos.
Regarding claim 19, the claim recites “The brake monitoring system of claim 16, wherein the brakes comprise disk brakes and wherein the thermocouple is coupled to a brake lining at a depth of 3/8 of an inch into said disk brake.” Bakonyi-Kiss teaches a brake monitoring system that includes thermocouple sensors integrated in every wheel of the vehicle. Hoefsloot further teaches programmable threshold comparison and driver notification features. (Fig. 1, col. 5, lines 30 – 45). However, it does not teach the brakes comprise air brakes and that the thermocouple is coupled to a brake shoe at a depth of 3/8 of an inch.
Shimura teaches that in a disk brake system, during braking, a piston actuates to move the brake pad into contact with the disk (see para [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bakonyi-Kiss in view of Hoefsloot with Shimura in order to apply known thermocouple-based brake monitoring, programmable thresholds, and driver notification features to a piston-actuated disk brake system, thereby enabling reliable thermal measurement and driver alerts during disk brake operation.
The combined system of Bakonyi-Kiss, Hoefsloot, and Shimura teaches thermocouple integration into a brake monitoring system with programmable thresholds and notifications applied to a disk brake environment. However, it does not teach placement of the thermocouple at a defined depth within the brake lining.
Krystos teaches sensor placement within brake lining of a drum brake system at a defined depth from the wear surface (Fig. 3, col. 3., lines 54 – 67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Krystos depth-based placement to the system of Bakonyi-Kiss, Hoefsloot, and Shimura in order to enhance measurement accuracy by ensuring consistent thermal sensing within the brake lining material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Manuel Castellon whose telephone number is (571)272-4575. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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.
/MANUEL SALVADOR CASTELLON/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855