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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application WO-2016179122 (WO’122).
Re: claim 1. WO’122 shows in figure 3 a trailer braking device employing reverse polarity engines to brake wheels of a trailer, said device comprising: a tow vehicle or the portion of the vehicle in front of element 301 having a plurality of rear axles shown under element number 312 and a plurality of wheels also shown under element number 312 each being rotatably disposed on a respective one of said rear axles wherein said plurality of wheels is configured to roll along a roadway, each of said rear axles being in mechanical communication with a power train disclosed in claims 1 and 3 of said tow vehicle; a trailer 301 being towable behind said tow vehicle, said trailer having a plurality of wheels shown under 316 and 318 each being rotatably attached to a respective one of a plurality of axles also shown under 316 and 318 wherein said plurality of wheels on said trailer is configured to roll along a roadway when said trailer is being towed; a plurality of vehicle motors or 344 associated with the vehicle sections under number 312, each of said plurality of vehicle motors being attached to a respective one of said pair of rear axles of said tow vehicle, each of said vehicle motors being in mechanical communication with a respective one of said plurality of wheels associated with said tow vehicle, each of said vehicle motors being actuatable into a braking condition having said vehicle motors rotating in an opposite direction with respect to said plurality of wheels associated with said tow vehicle for braking said tow vehicle; a plurality of trailer motors or 344 associated with the trailer sections under numbers 316 and 318, each of said trailer motors being attached to a respective one of said plurality of axles on said trailer, each of said trailer motors being in mechanical communication with a respective one of said wheels on said trailer, each of said plurality of trailer motors being actuatable into a braking condition having each of said plurality of trailer motors rotating in an opposite direction with respect to said plurality of wheels associated with said trailer for braking said trailer, each of said plurality of trailer motors being actuatable into an assist condition having each of said plurality of trailer motors rotating in the same direction as said plurality of wheels associated with said trailer for urging said trailer forwardly wherein said plurality of trailer motors is configured to assist said tow vehicle with towing said trailer up an incline thereby reducing fuel consumption of said tow vehicle as recited in claims 1 and 3; and a control unit 324 being integrated into said tow vehicle, said tow unit being in electrical communication a brake pedal in said tow vehicle, said control unit being in communication with each of said plurality of vehicle motors and each of said plurality of trailer motors, said control unit actuating each of said plurality of vehicle motors into said braking condition when said control unit detects that said brake pedal in said tow vehicle is depressed for slowing said tow vehicle via elements 328 and 362, said control unit actuating each of said trailer motors into said braking condition when said control unit detects that said brake pedal in said tow vehicle is depressed for slowing said trailer based on sensors 328 and 362.
Re: claims 2 and 3. WO’122 shows in figure 3 and discloses in claims 2 and 7 a plurality of vehicle speed sensors, each of said vehicle speed sensors being integrated into said tow vehicle, each of said vehicle speed sensors being in communication with a respective one of said wheels on said tow vehicle thereby facilitating each of said plurality of vehicle speed sensors to sense the rotational speed of said respective wheel on said tow vehicle; and a plurality of trailer speed sensors, each of said trailer speed sensors being integrated into said trailer, each of said trailer speed sensors being in communication with a respective one of said wheels on said trailer thereby facilitating each of said plurality of trailer speed sensors to sense the rotational speed of said respective wheel on said trailer. With regard to the assist condition limitation in claim 3, see the rejection of claim 1.
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) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO’122 in view of US Patent 10894534 to Hiller.
Re: claims 4-6. WO’122 shows in figure 3 and paragraph [0031] a trailer power supply or battery 342 but is silent with regard to the conductor cable.
Hiller teaches in figure 2 a connector connected to element 204 serving as the conductor cable connected to the elements to be supplied with power in the trailer with it terminating at a communication port 204 disposed on a front end of a trailer 200.
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 trailer of WO’122 to have included a conductor cable as recited, in view of the teachings of Hiller, to provide a means of ensuring that the components in the trailer are powered to ensure functionality and safety and to provide the port at the front of the trailer to shorten the distance to which the connecting portion from the tractor has to extend. With regard to claim 5, see the first plug at 162b and the second plug at 162a. With regard to claim 6 see the rejection of claims 1-5.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/8/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that WO’122 fails to include a system that provides the braking for both a vehicle and a trailer simultaneously using reverse polarity. Examiner emphasizes that the reverse polarity is mentioned in the preamble of the claims and only particularly recites a trailer brake device employing reverse polarity engines to brake wheels of a trailer. Examiner notes that Applicant fails to specifically point out how the reference fails to disclose or suggest the recited system. Examiner disagrees that WO’122 fails to disclose the recited system. As pointed out in paragraphs 4 and 7 above, Examiner notes that WO’122 satisfies all of the elements of the claims which define the preamble of the claim. WO’122 also does, in fact, describe in paragraph [0049] of WO’122 the use of motors being engaged with regenerative braking (i.e. reverse polarity of the motor) to slow down or brake the vehicle. Particularly, as shown in figure 2 of WO’122 the motor 112 is shown affixed to the underside of the frame of a trailer wheel and axle assembly 100 to affect the movement of the axle to which it is connected depending on the polarity of the motor. Accordingly, the above rejections using WO’122 have been maintained. Examiner notes that the previously presented claim objection and 112 rejections have been withdrawn in light of the most recent amendments.
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 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 11, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616