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 .
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 .
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) 1-4 and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim EP1752673 in view of Smith US6935470 and further in view of Kao (US 20080302616) or MacKelvie (20130175127) or Benini (3161260).
In re claim 1, Kim teaches a disc brake arrangement for a vehicle (abstract), comprising: a brake disc (10) that is rotatable about a rotational axis ; and at least one brake pad (30), wherein the brake disc comprises a disc member and an outer surface (outer surface of 12) at an outer circumferential face of the disc member and wherein the brake pad is displaceable relative to the brake lining, so as to contact the brake lining during braking for generating a brake force.
Kim is silent to a lining on the outer surface.
Smith teaches a lining (18) provided on an outer surface of a disk.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to have provided a lining on the braking surface of Kim as taught by Smith in order to improve braking efficiency (abstract).
Both Kim and Smith are silent to grooves on the pad or lining surface.
Kao (@19), MacKelvie (@41), and Benini (@11) all teach grooves or slots extending axially or circumferentially that extend radially inward with respect to the pad or lining surface. Utilizing a groove or slot on a brake lining is notoriously known in the brake are to assist with removal of moisture, dust, and debris.
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention to have provided the lining of Kim as modified by Smith with a groove or slot as taught by Kao, MacKelvie, or Benini in order to provide a mechanism to remove dirt, moisture and debris from the friction surface to prevent a decrease in the friction properties of the surface. (Bennini col 1 lines 30-40; MacKelvie para 32; Kao para 16)
In re claim 2, Smith teaches the brake lining comprises a friction material. The material of Smith is Carbon. Please note that a braking surface of a disc is considered a friction material.
In re claims 3 and 6. Smith teaches that the material for the pads and for the lining can be different materials (col 3 lines 39-50).
In re claim 4, Kim as modified by Smith teaches using different materials for the pads and the lining (col. 3 lines 39-50). It is notoriously known in the brake art that the softer material, generally the brake pads, are a maintenance item which is changed more frequently. It is noted, that in the arrangement of Kim, the disk (10) can be changed out easily due to the bolts (15), and because a caliper is not in the way of removing the disk. It should be recognized that either the disk or the pad can have a harder material. Due to the arrangement of Kim, and the material teaching of Smith it would have been obvious to try to provide the brake pad as the harder material as one of ordinary skill would recognize that the disk could be the wear part and can easily be switched out.
In re claim 7, Kim teaches wherein the brake lining forms a continuous ring (figure 2) extending along the outer circumferential face of the disc member.
IN re claim 8, Kim teaches a plurality of brake pads (30a, 30b) that are arranged at angular distances from one another about the rotational axis (figure 2).
In re claim 9, Kim teachers the brake pad is arranged at a radial distance to the brake disc when not braking (as shown in figure 2).
In re claim 10, Kim teaches that the size of the disk impacts the braking efficiency (Paragraph 47-48).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have made the disc with a diameter not larger than eight times an axial width of the brake lining as mere optimization of the dimensions provided as evidenced by Kim (para 47-48) in order to provide sufficient frictional force.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9, and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bombassei (DE2820065) in view of Smith US6935470 and further in view of Kao (US 20080302616) or MacKelvie (20130175127) or Benini (3161260).
In re claim 1, Bombassei teaches a disc brake arrangement for a vehicle (page 1 English translation under description), comprising: a brake disc (2) that is rotatable about a rotational axis; and at least one brake pad (24, 25), wherein the brake disc comprises a disc member and an outer surface (outer surface radial surface of 2) at an outer circumferential face of the disc member and wherein the brake pad is displaceable relative to the brake lining, so as to contact the brake lining during braking for generating a brake force. (page 3 2nd paragraph)
Bombassei is silent to a lining on the outer surface.
Smith teaches a lining (18) provided on an outer surface of a disk.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to have provided a lining on the braking surface of Bombassei as taught by Smith in order to improve braking efficiency (abstract).
Both Bombassei and Smith are silent to grooves on the pad or lining surface.
Kao (@19), MacKelvie (@41), and Benini (@11) all teach grooves or slots extending axially or circumferentially that extend radially inward with respect to the pad or lining surface. Utilizing a groove or slot on a brake lining is notoriously known in the brake are to assist with removal of moisture, dust, and debris.
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention to have provided the lining of Bombassei as modified by Smith with a groove or slot as taught by Kao, MacKelvie, or Benini in order to provide a mechanism to remove dirt, moisture and debris from the friction surface to prevent a decrease in the friction properties of the surface. (Bennini col 1 lines 30-40; MacKelvie para 32; Kao para 16)
In re claim 2, Smith teaches the brake lining comprises a friction material. The material of Smith is Carbon. Please note that a braking surface of a disc is considered a friction material.
In re claims 3 and 6. Smith teaches that the material for the pads and for the lining can be different materials (col 3 lines 39-50).
In re claim 4, Bombassai as modified by Smith teaches using different materials for the pads and the lining (col. 3 lines 39-50). It is notoriously known in the brake art that the softer material, generally the brake pads, are a maintenance item which is changed more frequently. It is noted, that in the arrangement of Bombassai, the disk (2) can be changed out instead of the pads. It should be recognized that either the disk or the pad can have a harder material. Due to the arrangement of Bombassai, and the material teaching of Smith it would have been obvious to try to provide the brake pad as the harder material as one of ordinary skill would recognize that the disk could be the wear part and can easily be switched out.
In re claim 7, Bombassei teaches wherein the brake lining forms a continuous ring (figure 2) extending along the outer circumferential face of the disc member.
IN re claim 8, Bombassei teaches a plurality of brake pads (24, 25) that are arranged at angular distances from one another about the rotational axis (figure 2).
In re claim 9, Bombassei teachers the brake pad is arranged at a radial distance to the brake disc when not braking (as shown in figure 3).
IN re claim 11, Bombassei teaches wherein the brake pad or a brake pad carrier carrying the brake pad comprises a recess (see figure 3) in which the brake lining is at least partially received.
In re claim 12, Bombassei teaches a brake pad carrier (22) carrying the brake pad comprises at least one radially protruding portion (22a, 22b) that is arranged or arrangeable adjacent a side face of the brake disc.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim EP1752673 or Bombassei (DE2820065) in view of in view of Smith US6935470 in view of Kao (US 20080302616) or MacKelvie (20130175127) or Benini (3161260) and further in view of Wirth (US 6588553).
Neither Kim or Bombassai teach a metallic material for the brake pads. However, Smith does teach choosing suitable materials for the friction surfaces.
Wirth teaches a plurality of friction materials which can be chosen for the brake pad including cast iron (col 5 lines 3-10)
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have provided the brake pad of Bombassai or Kim as modified by Smith with metallic pads as taught by Wirth based on availability of materials and cost.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DEVON C KRAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-7118. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Thursday 7AM-4PM; Friday Mornings.
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.
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.
DEVON C. KRAMER
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3746
/DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights