DETAILED ACTION
The Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed 08/19/26 has been entered. Claims 1-17 are currently pending, with claim 17 being newly added. In light of the claim amendments, the 103 rejection has been revised. However, the previous Drawing Objections and 112 rejections are maintained as detailed below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the friction material of the friction applying device being “biased in a direction in which the frictional force increases” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
All pending claims are rejected because claim 1 recites that the friction material of the friction applying device is “biased in a direction in which the frictional force increases,” but it is unclear from the Drawings or Detailed Description how this is achieved. The Detailed Description mentions the use of an “urging member” at paragraph [0030], but explicitly states that it is not illustrated in the Drawings, and does not provide any detail about where it is located, how it functions, how it achieves the force application, etc. Applicant should be mindful not to include new subject matter in subsequent amendments.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Baehrle-Miller in view of Sporer
Claim(s) 1-12 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baehrle-Miller (DE 102018210021) in view of Sporer (DE102006051304). Baehrle-Miller is directed to a motorcycle brake system. See Abstract. Sporer is directed to an electromagnetic brake operating method in a disc brake. See Abstract.
Claim 1: Baehrle-Miller discloses a brake system [Fig. 1] for a straddle-type vehicle [see Translation (“motorcycle”)] which includes at least one operator (36, 38) operated by a rider, the system comprising: a mechanism portion (10) including a friction applying device (26) which brakes a wheel (24) of the straddle-type vehicle with a frictional force corresponding to at least a movement of the operator, the mechanism portion further including an operator movement sensor [see Translation (“pedal travel sensor” or “pressure sensor”)] for detecting the movement of the operator and an actuator (14) unitized with the friction applying device, and a control unit (32) which controls an output of the actuator (41) based on a detection result of the operator movement sensor to change the frictional force applied to the wheel by the friction applying device during normal braking, the control unit driving the actuator during the normal braking with a driving amount corresponding to an output signal of the operator movement sensor. See Fig. 1; Translation.
Baehrle-Miller discloses all the limitations of this claim except for: (1) an inverse relationship between operator actuation and actuator output; and (2) the friction material being biased in a brake-apply direction such that the actuator applies a frictional force in a non-energized state. Sporer discloses a vehicle disc brake for braking a wheel [Fig. 1], with a control unit (22) that controls an actuator (20) to move a friction applying device (16) against a wheel/rotor disc (10), wherein when the actuator is in a non-energized state the friction material of the friction applying device is biased in a direction in which the frictional force increases due to the urging force of a spring (18), whereby the frictional force is applied to the wheel by the friction applying device braking the wheel. See Translation (“in the de-energized state, therefore, the brake is engaged”). This is similar to the instant application, which may rely on an “urging member such as a spring” built somewhere into the mechanism portion to provide the braking force when the actuator is non-energized. See Application, at para. 0030. Upon modifying Baehrle-Miller to have Sporer’s inverted relationship between actuator energization and brake applying force (due to spring bias in the application direction), it would necessarily follow that there would be an inverse relationship between operator movement and actuator output. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify Baehrle-Miller such that the brake device applies a brake force when the actuator is in a non-energized state with a reasonable expectation of success because this ensures a default/self-locking brake operation. This is especially useful not only in a parking brake situation where energy/actuation is only needed to release the brake, but also in normal service braking for safety reasons to ensure that the brake can/will be applied if the actuator and/or control unit malfunctions.
Claim 2: Sporer discloses that when the actuator is in an energized state, the frictional force applied to the wheel by the friction applying device decreases as the output of the actuator increases. See Fig. 1.
Claim 3: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the control unit is unitized with another control unit which changes a frictional force applied to another wheel different from the wheel. See Translation (“provided in particular on the real axle…additionally also on the front axle”).
Claim 4: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the control unit is unitized with the friction applying device and the actuator. See Fig. 1.
Claim 5: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the control unit is unitized with the operator movement sensor. See Fig. 1.
Claim 6: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the control unit controls the output of the actuator to change the frictional force applied to the wheel by the friction applying device during a slip control operation for controlling a slip of the wheel. See Translation.
Claim 7: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the slip control operation includes an operation in which anti-lock braking control is executed. See Translation (“in step 48 slip is detected, so in step 54 use an anti-lock strategy”).
Claim 8: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the slip control operation includes an operation in which spin suppression control is executed. See Translation (steps 54-56).
Claim 9: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the slip control operation includes an operation in which side-slip suppression control is executed. See Translation (steps 54-56).
Claim 10: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the wheel braked by the friction applying device is a rear wheel of the straddle-type vehicle. See Translation (“provided in particular on the rear axle”).
Claim 11: Baehrle-Miller discloses a straddle-type vehicle which includes the brake system according to claim 1. See Translation (“motorcycle”).
Claim 12: Baehrle-Miller discloses another mechanism portion including another friction applying device which brakes a front wheel of the straddle-type vehicle with a frictional force corresponding to at least a movement of another operator, and wherein when the other mechanism portion is in a non-energized state, the frictional force is applied to the front wheel by the friction applying device. See Translation (“provided in particular on the real axle…additionally also on the front axle”); Fig. 1.
Claim 15: Upon modifying Baehrle-Miller with Sporer, they disclose that when the actuator is in an energized state, the frictional force applied to the wheel by the friction applying device increases as the output of the actuator decreases by operation of the operator. See Fig. 1.
Claim 16: Upon modifying Baehrle-Miller with Sporer, they disclose that when the operator is not operated, the output of the actuator is increased to an upper limit. See Fig. 1.
Claim 17: Baehrle-Miller discloses that the friction material of the friction applying device pinches a disc rotor (24) and a spindle (16) of the friction applying device adjusts a distance of the friction material with respect to the disc rotor, and wherein the actuator is connected to the spindle and causes the spindle to make a linear movement for adjusting the distance. See Fig. 1.
Baehrle-Miller in view of Sporer and Tsuda
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baehrle-Miller in view of Sporer and Tsuda (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2023/0373589) (previously cited). Tsuda is directed to a motorcycle fluid pressure brake system. See Abstract.
Claims 13-14: Baehrle-Miller and Sporer are relied upon as in claim 12 above, and while Baehrle-Miller discusses the use of a pump and control valve for the hydraulic system [see, e.g., Translation (“actuator 30 can be represented by an ESP pump”), it does not provide the specific recited limitations of these claims. Tsuda discloses a fluid brake system for a motorcycle, with a mechanism portion (R1, K2) for the rear wheel, and another mechanism portion (K1, 100) that includes at least one valve (1, 2) controlling a flow of brake fluid, and wherein when the at least one valve is in a non-energized state, the frictional force is applied to the front wheel by the friction applying device. See Fig. 1. Tsuda further discloses that the other mechanism portion includes a pump (6) assembled in a fluid passage of brake fluid and a motor (20) driving the pump, and wherein when the motor is in a non-driving state, the frictional force is applied to the front wheel by the friction applying device. See Fig. 1. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include these features since Baehrle-Miller already explicitly discloses the use of a pump and control valve in the hydraulic brake system (which can also be used at the front wheel), and the use of a motor driving the pump and valves to control fluid flow is well-known and commonly employed in the art for an independently operational brake circuit.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL R SAHNI whose telephone number is (571)270-3838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm PST.
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.
VISHAL SAHNI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3657
/VISHAL R SAHNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 August 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights