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 .
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 15-17, 19-20, 24 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kingston et al. (U.S. 6230492).
Regarding claims 15 and 28, Kingston discloses (fig. 6) An actuation device (100) and a brake system (abstract at least), comprising:
an electric motor (102) configured to drive a drive shaft (122) mounted rotatably about an axis of rotation (X’); a housing (110); and
a main brake cylinder (106/112) rigidly connected to the housing, wherein at least one hydraulic piston (142) is displaceably mounted in the main brake cylinder (as shown), and wherein the drive shaft is coupled to the hydraulic piston such that the hydraulic piston can be displaced by rotation of the drive shaft (col. 7 lines 4-26);
wherein the electric motor is arranged in the housing (102 within 110 as shown), and the rigid connection of the main brake cylinder to the housing is provided at least in part by the drive shaft (housing 112 has a flange 162 which mounts to a bearing 124b mounted on the drive shaft 122, accordingly the drive shaft aids in placement and/or centering of the main brake cylinder at least, which aids in the “rigid connection” thereof).
Regarding claim 16, Kingston discloses (fig. 6) a first bearing (124b) configured to transmit axial forces1 and having a first bearing ring (outer race) and a second bearing ring (inner race), wherein the first bearing ring is rigidly connected to the main brake cylinder (as shown), and the second bearing ring is rigidly connected to the drive shaft (as shown).
Regarding claim 17, Kingston discloses (fig. 6) a second bearing (124a) configured to transmit axial forces1 and having a third bearing ring (outer race) and a fourth bearing ring (inner race), wherein the third bearing ring is fixed to the housing (as shown), and the fourth bearing ring is rigidly connected to the drive shaft (as shown).
Regarding claim 19, Kingston discloses (fig. 6) the housing has a cup-shaped recess (area where 124a is mounted), wherein the second bearing is arranged in the recess (as shown)
Regarding claim 20, Kingston discloses (fig. 6) the main brake cylinder has a connection flange (162), and the first bearing ring is rigidly connected to the connection flange (as shown).
Regarding claim 24, Kingston discloses (fig. 6) an actuation element (130) which is displaceably guided in the housing (as shown), wherein the guidance of the actuation element is provided at least in part by the electric motor (linear motion and position determined by electric motor 102).
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kingston et al. (U.S. 6230492) in view of Bosma (U.S. 4945780).
Regarding claim 18, Kingston does not appear to disclose tapered roller bearings. Bosma teaches (fig. 5) a shaft 58 supported by bearings 61 on either side relative to a housing 20, wherein the first bearing and/or the second bearing include tapered roller bearings (as shown, and col. 2 lines 67-68). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized tapered roller bearings to support the shaft 122 of Kingston relative to improve bearing properties. Tapered bearings have a larger contact area than ball bearings, thereby distributing the loads over a larger area which reduces stress, friction and heat.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kingston et al. (U.S. 6230492) in view of Weh et al. (DE 102015214585 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Kingston does not appear to disclose where the control unit is located, though a control unit needs to be present to tell the electric motor when to turn. In the same field of endeavor of brake control systems, Weh teaches an electric motor (1), main brake piston (22) with a piston bore (23), and a ball screw mechanism (26) to control the position of the piston, and a control unit (28) configured to control the electric motor, where the electric motor is on the far right side of the device and to the right of the piston, and the control unit is on the far left side of the device and to the left of the piston. In other words, the control unit and electric motor are placed on extreme opposite axial sides of the device. The control unit and electric motor communicate via a hole 29 with a multipolar connector 30.
In order to arrive at the claimed invention, the control unit would be placed on the opposite side of the device of Kingston. Since the electric motor is placed on the left side, the control unit would be placed on the far right side, opposite the electric motor from the hydraulic piston, as suggested by Weh. Upon making this modification, the connection flange of Kingston would be arranged axially between the electric motor on one side and the control unit on the other side, as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have placed the control unit on the right side of the device of Kingston, opposite the electric motor with respect to the piston, as suggested by Weh, as an obvious matter of engineering design choice.
In Kingston, the connection flange is axially to the right of the electric motor. Accordingly, there are only 5 possible options for where to axially place the control unit: 1) axially to the left of the motor in any location, 2) at the same axial position as the motor, 3) axially between the motor and the connection flange, 4) at the same axial position as the connection flange, and 5) axially to the right of the connection flange in any position. See annotated figure below. Note that these locations denote axial positioning only, and that the controller may be radially offset from the motor. Upon selecting option 5, one of ordinary skill in the art arrives at the claimed invention, and since only 5 options exist, this selection was performed without undue experimentation. There appears to be no particular benefit to arranging the connection flange axially between the electric motor and control unit versus any other axial position, such that an unexpected result is achieved, based on the current record.
PNG
media_image1.png
626
846
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 6 of Kingston
Regarding claim 22, Kingston as modified teaches the control unit is electrically connected by at least one electrical line (30) to a motor winding of the electric motor (ultimately the connection goes to the motor winding to tell the motor to energize), wherein the connection flange has an axial hole (29) through which the line extends.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 25-27 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends on pages 3-4 of the remarks that Kingston does not disclose “the rigid connection of the main brake cylinder to the housing is provided at least in part by the drive shaft” because the component relied upon (flange 162) is not connected to the main brake cylinder 112 but rather than motor housing 110. However, if this were true the device would be inoperable because it would be unable to be assembled. The motor 102 is inserted into the motor housing 110 from the right side, since the left side is closed off by the leftmost wall. The stator 114 extends radially within and radially beyond the flange 162. If the flange 162 were attached to the motor housing 110, the motor 102 would not be able to be installed into the housing 110 because the stator 114 would hit the flange 162. Further, in fig. 6 the hatching shown on the flange 162 matches the hatching of the hydraulic housing 112, and no break lines are shown between the two components, indicating that these two elements are connected and integral with one another. Accordingly, when considering what Kingston fairly teaches as a whole to one of ordinary skill in the art, it is understood that the flange 162 is connected to the main brake cylinder at 112. It is believed that the recitation in the specification of “The sensor 160 is disposed on a portion 162 of the motor housing 110” is intended to refer instead to hydraulic housing 112.
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 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
1 Note that “configured to transmit axial forces” merely requires the prior art to be capable of performing this function without structural modification, rather than a literal transmission of axial forces actually occurring. Nevertheless, the shape of the races shown in fig. 6 implies that the bearing is capable of supporting some axial loads.