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 § 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.
Claim 16 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “said brake pad". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as a brake pad is not identified in Claim 16 or the independent Claim 1.
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.
Claims 1, 3-8, 12, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner (DE 10233844 A1) in view of Wright (US 20100030490 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Wagner discloses a method of estimating wear of a vehicle brake element including at least a braking disk (6), a wearable block of friction material (2) and a support back plate (see Fig. 1) of said block of friction material the method comprising: providing a temperature sensor (22), providing an electronic processing unit (36) connected to said temperature sensor; providing an acquisition of the sensed temperature, a generation of a temperature signal of said sensed temperature and a transmission of said temperature signals to said electronic processing unit; and said electronic processing unit (36) providing an estimation of the thickness of said wearable block of friction material (2) by processing of said temperature signals (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Abstract. [0030-0034]).
Wagner appears to discloses the capability to be configured and placed to sense the temperature of the support back plate, but does not explicitly disclose it.
Wright teaches temperature sensors (322) being configured and placed to sense the temperature of the support back plate (306), providing an acquisition of the sensed temperature of said support back plates (see Fig. 3a, Fig. 8, [0100-0102]).
It would have been obvious to combine the temperature sensors configured and placed to sense the temperature of the support back plate of Wright with the method of estimating wear of a vehicle brake element of Wagner in order to improve accuracy of vehicle brake wear estimations (see DE 10233844 A1 [Wagner]; [0012-0013]).
Regarding Claim 3, Wagner does not disclose the temperature sensor being integrated in the support back plate.
Wright teaches a temperature sensor (322) being a contact temperature sensor integrated in the support back plate (306) (see Fig. 3a, Fig. 3b, [010-0102]).
Regarding Claim 4, Wagner discloses the temperature sensor (22) being a contactless temperature sensor (see 0022).
Regarding Claim 5, Wright teaches a temperature sensor (322) is configured and placed to sense a temperature of a surface of said support back plate (306) (see Fig. 3a, [010-0102]).
Regarding Claim 6, Wright teaches the surface according to claim 5 where the surface is a surface of said support back plate (306) facing to said wearable block of friction material (304) (see Fig. 3a, [010-0102]).
Regarding Claim 7, Wright teaches the surface of claim wherein said surface is a surface of said support back plate (306) opposite to said wearable block of friction material (304). (see Fig. 3a, [010-0102]).
Regarding Claim 8, Wagner appears to discloses the temperature sensor being capable of being configured and placed to sense a bulk temperature of the support back plate, but does not explicitly disclose it.
Wright teaches the temperature sensor (322) being configured and placed to sense a bulk temperature of said support back plate (306) (see Fig. 3a, Fig. 3b, [010-0102]).
Regarding Claim 12, Wagner discloses providing an ambient temperature sensor connected to said electronic processing unit (36), acquiring the ambient temperature, generating an ambient temperature signal of said ambient temperature, transmitting said ambient temperature signal to said electronic processing unit (36), and said electronic processing unit (36) processing said ambient temperature signal to adjust said estimation (see Fig. 2, [0012], [0035]).
Regarding Claim 15, Wagner discloses providing said brake element with at least a force sensor connected to said electronic processing unit (36), acquiring the force, generating a force signal of said force, transmitting said force signals to said electronic processing unit (36), and said electronic processing unit (36) processing said force signals to adjust said estimation and/or to select an event and/or to detect an event (see Fig. 2, [0022]).
Regarding Claim 16, Wagner discloses providing a thermal model of said brake pad (2) by creating a model of temperature dynamic correlated to a thickness of said block, and by making said estimation by selecting the model temperature dynamic that fits the measured temperature dynamic (see [0025]).
Regarding Claim 17, Wagner discloses a vehicle brake element (8) including wearable block of friction material (4), a support back plate of said block of friction material (see Fig. 1), a temperature sensor (22), and an electronic processing unit (36) configured to carry out a method according to claim 1 (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Abstract, [0030-0034]).
Wagner appears to discloses the capability to be configured and placed to sense the temperature of the support back plate, but does not explicitly disclose it.
Wright teaches temperature sensors (322) being configured and placed to sense the temperature of the support back plate (306) (see Fig. 3a, Fig. 8, [0100-0102]).
Regarding Claim 18, Wagner discloses a vehicle brake system (8) comprising: a wearable block of friction material (4); a support back plate (see Fig. 1) configured to support the block of friction material; a temperature sensor (22); and an electronic processing unit (36) configured to: receive sensed temperature measurements generated by the temperature sensor; process the temperature measurements to provide an estimation of the thickness of said wearable block of friction material (4) (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Abstract, [0030-0034]).
Wagner appears to discloses the capability to be configured to sense the temperature of the support back plate, but does not explicitly disclose it.
Wright teaches temperature sensors (322) being configured to sense the temperature of the support back plate (306) (see Fig. 3a, Fig. 3b, Fig. 8, [0100-0102]).
Claims 2, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner (DE 10233844 A1) as modified by Wright (US 20100030490 A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, further in view of Arndt (DE 10307014 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Wagner modified by Wright teaches the method of estimating wear of a vehicle brake element according to Claim 1.
Wagner appears to disclose the temperature time variation temperature signal being processed to provide said estimation, but does not explicitly disclose it.
Arndt teaches a temperature time variation of a temperature signal is processed to provide an estimation (see Abstract, [0017-0020]).
It would have been obvious to combine the temperature time variation of the temperature signal of Arndt with the method of estimating wear of Wagner modified by Wright in order to improve accuracy of the thickness estimation.
Regarding Claim 10, Wagner modified by Wright teaches the method of estimating wear of a vehicle brake element according to Claim 1.
Wagner appears to disclose the acquisition of said temperature signal being event based, but does not explicitly disclose it.
Arndt teaches the temperature signal acquisition being event based (see Fig. 2, [0017-0020]).
It would have been obvious to combine the temperature time variation of the temperature signal of Arndt with the method of estimating wear of Wagner modified by Wright in order to improve the efficiency of wear estimation (see DE 10307014 A1 [Arndt]; [0017-0020]).
Regarding Claim 11, Arndt teaches the event being a vehicle braking event (see [0017-0020]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner (DE 10233844 A1) as modified by Wright (US 20100030490 A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, further in view of Frentz (US 7,011,186 B2).
Regarding Claim 9, Wagner modified by Wright teaches the method of estimating wear of a vehicle brake element according to Claim 1.
Wagner modified by Wright does not teach the temperature acquisition being time based.
Frentz teaches the temperature acquisition being time based (see 3:27-44).
It would have been obvious to combine the time-based acquisition of Frentz with the method of estimating wear of Wagner modified by Wright in order to detect wear that may occur without the vehicle feeling large forces (see US 7011186 B2 [Frentz]; 3:27-44).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner (DE 10233844 A1) as modified by Wright (US 20100030490 A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, further in view of Hwang (KR 101347701 B1).
Regarding Claim 13, Wagner modified by Wright teaches the method of estimating wear of a vehicle brake element according to Claim 1.
Wagner modified by Wright does not teach the use of a vehicle accelerometer in the method.
Hwang teaches providing a vehicle accelerometer (30) connected to said electronic processing unit (50), acquiring the vehicle acceleration, generating an acceleration signal of said vehicle acceleration, transmitting said vehicle acceleration signals to said electronic processing unit (50), and said electronic processing unit (50) processing said acceleration signal to adjust said estimation and/or to select an event and/or to detect an event (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, [0013-0015]).
It would have been obvious to combine the use of an accelerometer of Hwang with the method of estimating wear of Wagner modified by Wright in order to improve the accuracy of wear estimation (see DE 10233844 A1 [Wagner]; [0012-0013]).
Regarding Claim 14, Hwang teaches providing a vehicle motion sensor (20) connected to said electronic processing unit (50), acquiring the vehicle motion, generating a vehicle motion signal of said vehicle motion, transmitting said vehicle motion signals to said electronic processing unit (50), and said electronic processing unit (50) processing said motion signals to adjust said estimation and/or to select an event and/or to detect an event (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, [0013-0015]).
It would have been obvious to combine the use of an vehicle motion sensor of Hwang with the method of estimating wear of Wagner modified by Wright in order to improve the accuracy of wear estimation (see DE 10233844 A1 [Wagner]; [0012-0013]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright (US 20100030490 A1) in view of Wagner (DE 10233844 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, Wright discloses non-transitory computer readable media (520) storing instructions that, when executed by a processor (510), cause the processor to execute a method comprising: receiving sensed temperature measurements generated by a temperature sensor (322) configured to detect the temperature of a support back plate (306) (that supports a wearable block of friction material (304) of a vehicle braking element (810); and process the temperature measurements to provide an estimation of the wear condition of the vehicle braking system (820) (see Fig. 3, Fig. 5, Fig. 8, [0043].
Wright does not explicitly disclose the wear condition being the thickness of said wearable block of friction material.
Wagner teaches the wear condition estimation being the thickness of the wearable block of friction material (4) (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, [0011]).
It would have been obvious to combine the wear condition being the thickness of the wearable block of friction material of Wanger with the computer readable media and processor executing a method of Wright in order to efficiently determine wear condition of the vehicle braking element.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Passalacqua et. al. (US 9,022,184 B2).
Passalacqua discloses a vehicle brake system backing plate with integrated temperature probes and wear sensors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shea Irvin whose telephone number is (571)272-9952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 - 17:00.
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.
/S.W.I./Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616