DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) for the following informalities:
Reference character “101” has been used to designate both a tractor and a trailer (see page 14 lines 7-12).
Reference character “152” has been used to designate both a source and an upstream conduit (see page 13 lines 14-16).
Reference character “184” has been used to designate both primary reservoir/tank and a brake relay module (see page 15 lines 1-2).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The identified claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites, “a transport vehicle”, which should be amended to recite –the transport vehicle--, since this limitation was previously recited in claim 1.
Claim 4 recites, “upom”, which should be amended to read –upon--.
Claim 7 recites, “a transport vehicle”, which should be amended to recite –the transport vehicle--, since this limitation was previously recited in claim 1.
Claim 7 does not end in a period
Claim 16 recites “receiving… a brake release command while the trailer is disposed in a stationary parked position the trailer controller circuit supported by the frame”. This appears to be a run-on phrase, which could be alleviated by adding a comma after the limitation “a stationary parked position”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter, which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter, which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the trailer controller performing the… brake release operation to release the brake assembly and permit relocation of the tractor trailer”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Previously recited was “a trailer controller circuit”, which is directed to the circuit rather than the controller for that circuit.
Claim 20 recites “supply electrical power to the trailer controller”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Previously recited was “a trailer controller circuit”, which is directed to the circuit rather than the controller for that circuit.
Dependent claims not specifically mentioned are rejected due to dependency on a rejected base claim for failing to cure the deficiencies of the base claim.
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 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.
Claims 1, 5-13, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Magzimof et al (U.S. 2020/0269822).
Regarding claim 1, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) A tractor trailer with self-contained brake release capabilities, the tractor trailer comprising:
a frame supportable on a roadway by a wheel assembly (implied, typical structure for a semi-trailer. See pgh. 0005-0006 at least), the wheel assembly having an air-release brake assembly (200) configured to respectively facilitate rotation of the wheel assembly responsive to a pressure of pressurized air within a brake inlet conduit (one of 209,210) being above a selected pressure level and to reduce rotation of the wheel assembly responsive to the pressure of the pressurized air within the brake inlet conduit being below the selected pressure level (pgh. 0065 at least, air pressure is sent into the pneumatic system to disengage the brake. Absence of such pressure would result in brake engagement);
a coupling mechanism supported by the frame and configured for mating engagement with a transport vehicle for towed movement of the trailer (see pgh. 0065, “king-pin”);
a reservoir (216) supported by the frame and configured to store pressurized air;
a flow valve (207 at least) supported by the frame in fluidic communication with the reservoir and the brake inlet conduit of the brake assembly (see pgh. 0065 at least); and
a trailer controller circuit (e.g. including 203) supported by the frame and configured to perform a self-contained brake release operation while the trailer is in a stationary, parked position (see pgh. 0065, trailer is in a parked state when picked up by the unmanned yard truck 106) without a presence of pressurized air from an external source, the trailer controller performing the self-contained brake release operation to release the brake assembly and permit relocation of the tractor trailer via rolling movement of the wheel assembly by, responsive to receipt of a wireless brake release command (yard truck 106 sends a signal to the computer 203 to open the tank valve, via wireless comms unit 205), transitioning the flow valve from a first valve position (valve closed, brakes engaged) in which the reservoir is fluidically isolated from the inlet brake conduit to a second valve position (valve open, brakes released) in which the reservoir is fluidically coupled to the inlet brake conduit and the pressurized air from the reservoir flows through the brake inlet conduit to the brake assembly at a pressure that is at or above the selected pressure level (see pgh.0065 at least).
Regarding claim 5, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) the trailer controller is further configured to subsequently perform a self-contained brake engagement operation to engage the brake assembly once the trailer has come to another stationary, parked position after movement of the trailer while the brake assembly was released by, responsive to receipt of a wireless brake engagement command, transition the flow valve from the second valve position to the first valve position, thereby decoupling the reservoir from the brake inlet conduit and enabling a spring biasing assembly of the brake assembly to lock the brakes and prevent further rotation of the wheel assembly (pgh. 0065, dissociation procedure is performed, and brake becomes engaged).
Regarding claim 6, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) an electrical power source (206) supported by the frame, the electrical power source supplying electrical power to the trailer controller (203) and at least one electrical load of the tractor trailer (e.g. wireless device 205, sensors, etc.) during the self-contained brake engagement operation.
Regarding claim 7, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) the tractor trailer is configured to be moved by a transport vehicle (unmanned yard truck 106) from an initial parked position to a destination parked position without any electrical interconnection or pneumatic interconnection between the transport vehicle and the tractor trailer (association procedure occurs wirelessly, see pgh. 0065).
Regarding claim 8, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) in combination with an autonomous, electrically powered yard shifter (106) configured to move the tractor trailer from an initial parked position to a destination parked position (see pgh. 0065), the yard shifter configured to transmit the brake release command to the trailer controller (see pgh. 0065), the trailer controller configured to release the brake assembly and allow movement of the tractor trailer by the yard shifter without any electrical or pneumatic interconnection between the tractor trailer and the yard shifter (see pgh. 0065).
Regarding claim 9, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) the brake release command comprises a container identification (ID) as a unique value assigned to the tractor trailer, and wherein the trailer controller verifies the container ID corresponds to the tractor trailer using a locally stored value in memory prior to authorizing the self- contained brake release operation (see pgh. 0066-0068, barcode, QR code, or RFID tag identified by the truck 106 in order to correctly identify the exact unit).
Regarding claim 10, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) an electrically driven air compressor supported by the frame and used, as directed by the trailer controller, to replenish pressurized air within the reservoir (see pgh. 0070).
Regarding claim 11, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) the trailer controller comprises a programmable processor and associated memory which stores program instructions which are executed by the programmable processor to perform the self-contained brake release operation (see pgh. 0079).
Regarding claim 12, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) a plurality of sensors (pressure transducers 202, 211 at least), wherein the trailer controller performs data logging to accumulate data from the sensors associated with the movement of the trailer upon (pgh. 0074, “store” the information at least) the releasing of the brake assembly by the trailer controller, and wherein the trailer controller subsequently transmits, via a wireless communication channel, the accumulated data to a source of the brake release command (pgh. 0074, “transmit” the information to the truck 106).
Regarding claim 13, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) a geolocation sensor (see pgh. 0056 at least) which enables the trailer controller to detect a geolocation of the tractor trailer (transmitting the location to the truck 106), wherein the trailer controller is further configured to verify the detected geolocation of the tractor trailer is within a permitted area (in the yard 100, see pgh. 0056) prior to performing the self-contained brake release operation, and wherein the trailer controller is further configured to not perform the self-contained brake release operation responsive to a determination that the detected geolocation is not within a permitted area (pgh. 0065, system 200 is placed in “inventory”, i.e. not in the permitted area of the yard, thus it will not perform the brake release operation).
Regarding claim 16, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) A method, comprising:
storing a volume of pressurized air in a reservoir (216) supported by a frame of a tractor trailer (implied, typical structure for a semi-trailer. See pgh. 0005-0006 at least), the tractor trailer having a wheel assembly (implied, typical structure for a semi-trailer. See pgh. 0005-0006 at least) with an air-release brake assembly (200) configured to respectively facilitate rotation of the wheel assembly responsive to a pressure of pressurized air within a brake inlet conduit (e.g. 209,210) being above a selected pressure level and to prevent rotation of the wheel assembly responsive to the pressure of the pressurized air within the brake inlet conduit being below the selected pressure level (pgh. 0065 at least, air pressure is sent into the pneumatic system to disengage the brake. Absence of such pressure would result in brake engagement);
receiving, by a trailer controller circuit via a wireless communication channel (via 205), a brake release command while the trailer is disposed in a stationary parked position the trailer controller circuit supported by the frame (see pgh. 0065, yard truck 106 sends a signal to the computer 203 to open the tank valve); and
using the trailer controller circuit to perform a self-contained brake release operation responsive to receipt of the brake release command by transitioning a flow valve (207) supported by the frame in fluidic communication with the reservoir and the brake inlet conduit of the brake assembly from a first valve position (valve closed, brakes engaged) in which the reservoir is fluidically isolated from the inlet brake conduit to a second valve position (valve open, brakes released) in which the reservoir is fluidically coupled to the inlet brake conduit and the pressurized air from the reservoir flows through the brake inlet conduit to the brake assembly at a pressure that is at or above the selected pressure level (see pgh. 0065).
Regarding claim 18, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) the tractor trailer further comprises a coupling mechanism (see pgh. 0065, “king-pin”) supported by the frame and configured for engagement with a transport vehicle (106) to enable the transport vehicle to tow the tractor trailer, wherein the brake release command is transmitted by the transport vehicle (see pgh. 0065), and wherein no air pressure connection is established between the tractor trailer and the transport vehicle to supply pressurized air from the transport vehicle to the tractor trailer during movement of the tractor trailer by the transport vehicle (see pgh. 0065, transport vehicle merely connects the trailer hitch and the system 200 provides the pressurized air).
Regarding claim 19, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) using the trailer controller circuit to subsequently perform a self-contained brake engagement operation to engage the brake assembly once the trailer has come to another stationary, parked position after movement of the trailer while the brake assembly was released by, responsive to receipt of a wireless brake engagement command, transition the flow valve from the second valve position to the first valve position, thereby decoupling the reservoir from the brake inlet conduit and enabling a spring biasing assembly of the brake assembly to lock the brakes to prevent further rotation of the wheel assembly (pgh. 0065, dissociation procedure is performed, and brake becomes engaged).
Regarding claim 20, Magzimof discloses (figs. 2-5) using an electrical power source (206) supported by the frame comprising at least one battery (pgh. 0022 at least) to supply electrical power to the trailer controller and at least one electrical load (e.g. wireless device, sensors, etc.) of the tractor trailer during the self-contained brake engagement operation without a connection to the tractor trailer, via an electrical conduit, from an external power source (the system is self-contained, as shown).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magzimof et al (U.S. 2020/0269822) in view of Ferola et al. (WO 2019/030105).
Regarding claim 14, Magzimof does not appear to disclose the particular brake structure. In the same field of endeavor of trailer brake systems, Ferola teaches (fig. 2) a pneumatic brake system including a pneumatic solenoid assembly (system including solenoids 67, 74, 33’ deemed a “pneumatic solenoid assembly”) coupled to a brake pad (functionally, via supply lines), wherein application of the pressurized air at a pressure above the selected threshold level advances the brake pad away from a brake surface to facilitate rotation of the wheel assembly (page 2 lines 25-29 at least, spring applied brake that is released by pneumatic pressure to the piston), and wherein removal of the pressurized air enables a spring biasing mechanism of the pneumatic solenoid assembly to bring the brake pad into contacting engagement with the brake surface to prevent rotation of the wheel assembly (page 8 lines 11-18, spring 16 urges brake pad into engagement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the pneumatic brake structure of Ferola within the tractor trailer brake system of Magzimof as an obvious matter of engineering design choice. Providing the two devices together does not alter the operation of the tractor trailer system of Magzimof, nor the trailer brake of Ferola, rather each invention operates in the same manner after combining as they did separately. Upon making the combination, the combined device achieves the benefits of both together rather than separately, namely that the brake is able to be released without an external air supply from the tractor (Magzimof) while maintaining safety considerations due to the presence of various solenoid valves within the system (Ferola).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 15 and 17 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and if rewritten to overcome any 112(b) rejections, as appropriate.
Reasons for allowance, if applicable, will be the subject of a separate communication to the Applicant or patent owner, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.104 and MPEP § 1302.14.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Niglas ‘952 discloses an apparatus for filling a trailer reservoir.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID MORRIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3595. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM - 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.
/DAVID MORRIS/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/DAVID R MORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616