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 .
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim 1 is amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US-5385126-A to Kulczycki (“Kulczycki”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kulczycki discloses a wheel end assembly (Col 3 line 22) comprising: a spindle (“a cylindrical extension of the wheel assembly rotor” received by 20 “central opening”, Col 3 lines 26-29; a brake rotor (14 “plate section” of 10 “brake disc and drum assembly” including 14 “rotor” integral with “12 “hat section” Col 3 lines 10-18, Fig 1) that is rotatable about an axis (Col 3 lines 15-17) with respect to the spindle; a brake assembly (14 brake rotor 42, 44 “pads” etc., Fig 1) having a brake caliper (not shown, known in the art as in integral component of a brake disc/pad assembly to contact/actuate the brake pads against the brake disc, Col 3, lines 25-29) and first and second brake pads (45 (only one shown) to engage 42, 44 “inboard and outboard braking surfaces”, Col 4 lines 23-44, Fig 1) disposed on opposite sides of (Fig 1) the brake rotor, the first and second brake pads being configured to engage first and second contact surfaces (42, 44 “inboard and outboard braking surfaces”, Col 4 lines 23-44, Fig 1) of the brake rotor; and a parking brake (12 “hat section” with 24 “skirt” 28 “braking surface”, 50 “brake shoe”, Col 3 lines 19-67, Col 4 lines 13, Claim 1 lines 3-54) that is radially disposed between (Fig 1) the spindle (spindle (not shown) is received in 20 central opening”, Col 3 lines 27-29 ) and the brake rotor, the parking brake being operable to apply a brake torque to inhibit rotation of the brake rotor about the axis (an implicit function of brake systems, Col 3 lines 47-58,).
Regarding Claim 2, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 1 wherein the parking brake encircles the spindle (Fig 1 shows 50, 28, 24 encircle 20 where spindle is received).
Regarding Claim 3, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 1 wherein the brake rotor encircles the parking brake (Fig 1 shoes 14 encircles parking brake 50,28,24).
Regarding Claim 4, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 1 wherein the brake rotor (14 integral with 12, both part of 10, thus a 28 on 24 is considered a part of 14) further comprises a friction surface (28 “friction surface”) that faces toward (Fig 1) the axis and the parking brake further comprises a friction member (50 “brake shoe”) that is engageable with the friction surface to provide the brake torque (Col 3 lines 47-58).
Regarding Claim 5, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 4 wherein the friction surface encircles (Fig 1) the friction member.
Regarding Claim 7, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 4 wherein the parking brake further comprises a parking brake body (24 “skirt” of 12 “hat section”), wherein the friction member is fixedly disposed on the parking brake body (Col 3 lines 40-43).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 6, 8, 10-12, 15-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kulczycki as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of US-2227584-A to Holk (“Holk).
Regarding Claim 6, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 4, but does not disclose wherein the friction surface is disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis.
Holk discloses a brake (99 “drum” i.e. hat section, and 94 “brake shoe/disc” with 95 “conical portion”[frictional surface at an oblique angle], a brake actuator to move axially outward via air 86 “cylinders” and 91 “pistons”, and braking deactivated by retracting brake to move axially inward 105 two axial “springs” located radially between brake and 22 “spindle” Page 3 lines 1-67 Fig 7, 9) having a friction surface is disposed at an oblique angle (Page 7 lines 21-34 , Fig 7, 9) with respect to the axis.
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel end assembly and the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel end assembly of Kulczycki and the teaching of the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis of Holk to modify the orientation of the frictional surface such that it is disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis, with the motivation to increase the surface area of the braking surface within the same axial length of the hat portion, and thus increase the braking effectiveness, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 8, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 7, but does not disclose wherein the parking brake body is moveable along the axis between a first position in which the friction member engages the friction surface of the brake rotor and a second position in which the friction member does not engage the friction surface of the brake rotor.
Holk discloses a brake (99 “drum” i.e. hat section, and 94 “brake shoe/disc” with 95 “conical portion”[frictional surface at an oblique angle], a brake actuator [to engage brake with friction surface] to move axially outward via air 86 “cylinders” and 91 “pistons”, and braking deactivated [not engaging friction surface] by retracting brake to move axially inward 105 two axial “springs” located radially between brake and 22 “spindle” Page 3 lines 1-67 Fig 7, 9) having a friction surface is disposed at an oblique angle (Page 7 lines 21-34 , Fig 7, 9) with respect to the axis.
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel end assembly and the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis and the brake is moveable along the axis between a first position in which the friction member engages the friction surface of the brake rotor and a second position in which the friction member does not engage the friction surface of the brake rotor in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel end assembly of Kulczycki and the teaching of the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis of Holk, to modify the orientation of the frictional surface such that it is disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis with the motivation to increase the surface area of the braking surface within the same axial length of the hat portion, and thus increase the braking effectiveness, and such that it includes an actuator to move the brake axially along the axis between a first position in which the friction member engages the friction surface of the brake rotor and a second position in which the friction member does not engage the friction surface of the brake rotor with the motivation to enable an actuator engage and retract the brake, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 10, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 7 but does not disclose wherein the parking brake further comprises a biasing member that urges the parking brake body to move along the axis.
Holk discloses a brake (99 “drum” i.e. hat section, and 94 “brake shoe/disc” with 95 “conical portion”[frictional surface at an oblique angle], a brake actuator to move axially outward via air 86 “cylinders” and 91 “pistons”, and braking deactivated by retracting brake to move axially inward 105 two axial “springs” located radially between brake and 22 “spindle” on circumferential line encircling spindle, Page 3 lines 1-67 Fig 7, 9) having a friction surface is disposed at an oblique angle (Page 7 lines 21-34 ,Fig 7, 9) with respect to the axis.
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel end assembly and the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis and a biasing member that urges the parking brake body to move along the axis a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel end assembly of Kulczycki and the teaching of the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis of Holk to modify the orientation of the frictional surface such that it is disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis with the motivation to increase the surface area of the braking surface within the same axial length of the hat portion, and thus increase the braking effectiveness, and such that it includes a biasing member that urges the parking brake body to move along the axis with the motivation to enable an actuator that retract the brake, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Kulczycki and Holt discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 10 wherein the biasing member is radially disposed (as described in paragraph 15 of this document) between the parking brake body and the spindle.
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Kulczycki and Holt discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 10 wherein the parking brake body encircles the biasing member and the biasing member encircles the spindle (as described in paragraph 15 of this document)).
Regarding Claim 15, Kulczycki discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 7, but does not disclose wherein the parking brake further comprises an actuator that urges the parking brake body to move along the axis.
Holk discloses a brake (99 “drum” i.e. hat section, and 94 “brake shoe/disc” with 95 “conical portion”[frictional surface at an oblique angle], a brake actuator [radially disposed between and encircling the spindle and the parking brake body, Fig 7, 8] to move axially outward by air/fluid fluidly connects via fluid passage [82 “hose” 83 “pipes” 84 “couplings”, page 2 right col, lines 59-70] through brake body and connects to actuator: 86 “cylinders” and 91 “pistons”, and braking deactivated by retracting brake to move axially inward 105 two axial “springs” located radially between brake and 22 “spindle” Page 3 lines 1-67 Fig 7, 9) having a friction surface is disposed at an oblique angle (Page 7 lines 21-34 ,Fig 7, 9) with respect to the axis.
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel end assembly and the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis and an actuator that urges the parking brake body to move along the axis, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel end assembly of Kulczycki and the teaching of the brake having a friction surface disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis and an actuator that urges the parking brake body to move along the axis of Holk to modify the orientation of the frictional surface such that it is disposed at an oblique angle with respect to the axis, and such that it is actuated by an actuator that urges the parking brake body to move along the axis with the motivation to increase the surface area of the braking surface within the same axial length of the hat portion, and thus increase the braking effectiveness when actuated, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Kulczycki and Holt discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 15 wherein the actuator is inflatable with a fluid and the parking brake body moves away from the brake rotor when the actuator is inflated with the fluid (as described in paragraph 20 of this document).
Regarding Claim 17 the combination of Kulczycki and Holt discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 15 wherein the parking brake body further comprises a fluid passage that extends through the parking brake body and is fluidly connected to the actuator(as described in paragraph 18 of this document).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Kulczycki and Holt discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 15 wherein the actuator engages the parking brake body and encircles the spindle(as described in paragraph 18 of this document).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Kulczycki and Holt discloses the wheel end assembly of claim 15 wherein the actuator is radially disposed between the spindle and the parking brake body (as described in paragraph 18 of this document).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 13, 14 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to disclose, teach or make obvious the following limits of Claims: 9, 13, 14 and 19.
Regarding Claim 9, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the wheel end assembly of claim 7 wherein the parking brake body and the spindle have mating splines that permit the parking brake body to move axially with respect to the spindle.
Regarding Claim 13, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the wheel end assembly of claim 10 wherein the parking brake further comprises a retainer that is fixedly positioned with respect to the spindle, wherein the biasing member extends between the retainer and the parking brake body.
Regarding Claim 14, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the wheel end assembly of claim 13 wherein the spindle further comprises a spline, the retainer further comprises a retainer spline, and the retainer spline mates with the spline to inhibit movement of the retainer with respect to the spindle.
Regarding Claim 19, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the wheel end assembly of claim 15 wherein the parking brake further comprises a fastener that is fixedly disposed on the spindle, wherein the actuator extends between the fastener and the parking brake body.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Schwarz (US-20140144730-A1), Leiter (US20220389981-A1), and Miller (US-20130112512-A1) disclose wheel end assemblies including one or more of: disc brake, two brake pads, parking brake with spindle and oblique surface to which friction surface/pad is attached.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments see Remarks, filed 05/05/2026, with respect to rejection of claims 1-15 and 18-20 under 35 USC § 102(a)(1) and rejection of claims 16-17 under 35 USC § 103 have been considered, but are moot because the new ground of rejection resulting from amendments to claim 1, for which a new set of rejections in included herein.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 EVA LYNN COMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Joe Morano can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights