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.
Claims 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding independent claim 1, the phrase “first and second PTU outputs” is indefinite because the initialism “PTU” has not been defined by the specification or the claims. As such, it is not clear what the initialism “PTU” requires.
Regarding independent claim 1, the phrase “a low pressure accumulator interposed hydraulically between the first and second pairs of wheel brakes” is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by being “interposed hydraulically between the first and second pairs of wheel brakes.” The specification of the present application states that the “[t]he brake systems of Figs. 1-2 and 6 also include a low pressure accumulator 148 interposed hydraulically between the first and second pairs of wheel brakes 102” (see ¶ 0038), but neither of the accumulators (148a, 148b) in Figure 2 are shown as being hydraulically interposed between the first and second pairs of wheel brakes 102. Rather, a first low pressure accumulator (148a) is connected to the first pair of wheel brakes and a second low pressure accumulator (148b) is connected to the second pair of wheel brakes.
Regarding claims 2, 3, 7, 8, 12, 13 the phrase “iso/dump control valve arrangement” is indefinite because it is unclear whether this requires an “iso control valve arrangement or a dump control valve arrangement” or rather an “iso control valve and dump control valve arrangement.”
Regarding claim 12, the phrase “a same iso valve type as is the iso valve of the iso/dump control valve arrangement” is indefinite because it is unclear whether the traction control iso valve is required to be same, or rather, of the same “type” where it is unclear how similar that the traction control valve must be to be considered the same “type.” Furthermore it is unclear whether the traction control iso valve must be the same as the iso valve, the dump valve, or both of the iso valve and the dump valve.
Regarding claim 14, the phrase “the low pressure accumulator is a first low pressure accumulator, and wherein the brake system includes a second low pressure accumulator spaced hydraulically apart from the first low pressure accumulator by the secondary brake module, each of the first and second low pressure accumulators being operative to selectively regulate hydraulic fluid for a corresponding first or second pair of wheel brakes” is indefinite because claim 1 recites that the low pressure accumulator is “interposed hydraulically between the first and second pairs of wheel brakes.” It is unclear how the low pressure accumulator can be both “interposed hydraulically between the first and second pairs of wheel brakes” (see claim 1) and at the same time be configured as a first low pressure accumulator connected to a first pair of wheel brakes and a second low pressure accumulator spaced apart from the first low pressure accumulator and connected to a second pair of wheel brakes (see claim 14).
Regarding claim 16-20, the initialism “LPA” is indefinite because it has not been defined by the specification or the claims. Furthermore, it is unclear whether the addition of “LPA” to other elements (e.g. “LPA piston”) requires any structural difference to the element itself (e.g. is an “LPA piston” distinct from a “piston”?).
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 1-7, 9, 13, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnishi et al. (US 2014/0026557) in view of Knechtges et al. (US 2015/0314686).
Regarding independent claim 1, Ohnishi discloses a brake system (see Abstract, FIG. 1) for actuating a plurality of wheel brakes (32FL, 32RR, 32RL, 32FR) comprising first (32FL, 32RR) and second (32RL, 32FR) pairs of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), the system comprising: a reservoir (84); a motor-driven master cylinder (16) operable during a normal non-failure braking mode (see ¶ 0166) by actuation of an electric motor (72) of the master cylinder to generate brake actuating pressure at first (24b) and second (24a) MC outputs for hydraulically actuating the first and second pairs of wheel brakes (see ¶ 0166; FIG. 1), respectively; a secondary brake module (136) configured for selectively providing pressurized hydraulic fluid at first and second PTU outputs (140) (see FIG. 1) for actuating the first and second pairs of wheel brakes in at least one of a normal non-failure braking mode and a backup braking mode (see ¶ 0213), the secondary brake module including an electric PTU motor (M) configured to selectively pressurize the hydraulic fluid by transmitting rotary motion to at least two pumps (136), each pump providing pressurized hydraulic fluid to a corresponding one of the first and second PTU outputs (see FIG. 1), each of the first and second PTU outputs providing fluid to a corresponding one of the first and second pairs of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1); and a low pressure accumulator (132) interposed hydraulically between the first and second pairs of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1; see also claim 14, below – “a low pressure accumulator interposed hydraulically” includes a first and a second low pressure accumulator respectively connected to the first and second pairs of wheel brakes), the low pressure accumulators being in indirect fluid communication with the reservoir via the first and second MC outputs and the master cylinder (see FIG. 1); and an electronic control unit (see ¶ 0166, “ECU”) for controlling at least one of the secondary brake module and the master cylinder responsive to at least one brake pressure signal (see ¶ 0164); wherein the low pressure accumulator at least partially provides slip control to the first and second pairs of wheel brakes in coordination with the secondary brake module when the brake system is in the normal non-failure braking mode (see ¶¶ 0159, 0215).
Ohnishi does not disclose that the pumps are piston pumps.
Knechtges teaches a brake system (see Abstract, FIG. 1) comprising a pump that is configured as a piston pump (see ¶ 0035).
It would have been obvious to configure the pump of Ohnishi as a pump piston to implement a configuration of a pump that is known to be suitable for use in brake systems (see e.g. Knechtges, ¶ 0035).
Regarding claim 2, Ohnishi discloses an iso/dump control valve arrangement (120, 124, 128, 130) associated with each wheel brake of the plurality of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), each iso/dump control valve arrangement being controlled by the electronic control unit (see ¶¶ 0160, 0216).
Regarding claim 3, Ohnishi discloses that each iso/dump control valve arrangement is in fluid communication with both a selected one of the first and second MC outputs and a selected one of the first and second PTU outputs for selectively receiving pressurized hydraulic fluid therefrom (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Ohnishi discloses that a first brake pressure sensor (Pp) is interposed hydraulically between the first MC output and a corresponding first pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1) and a second brake pressure sensor (Ph) is interposed hydraulically between the second MC output and a corresponding second pair of wheel brakes (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Knechtges teaches that the secondary brake module includes a plurality of pump pistons associated with each of the first and second PTU outputs (see ¶ 0035).
Regarding claim 6, Ohnishi discloses a first traction control iso valve (116) hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the first pair of wheel brakes via the first MC outlet (see FIG. 1); and a second traction control iso valve (116) hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the second pair of wheel brakes via the second MC outlet (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Ohnishi discloses an iso/dump control valve arrangement (120, 124, 128, 130) associated with each wheel brake of the first and second pairs of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), wherein the first traction control iso valve is hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the iso/dump control valve arrangements of the first pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), and wherein the second traction control iso valve is hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the iso/dump control valve arrangements of the second pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Ohnishi discloses a first bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the first traction control iso valve and a front brake of the first pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), and including a second bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the second traction control iso valve and a front brake of the second pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), wherein each of the first and second bypass iso valves is a normally open iso valve and is configured to close responsive to higher hydraulic fluid pressure on an upstream (i.e., closer to the master cylinder) side of the bypass valve (see ¶ 0158).
Regarding claim 13, Ohnishi discloses a first bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the first traction control iso valve and a front brake of the first pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), and including a second bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the second traction control iso valve and a front brake of the second pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), wherein each of the first and second bypass iso valves is oriented (see ¶ 0158, FIG. 1) in an opposite fluid flow direction as is the iso valve (see ¶ 0158, “inlet valve 120”) of the iso/dump control valve arrangement (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Ohnishi discloses that the low pressure accumulator is a first low pressure accumulator (132), and wherein the brake system includes a second low pressure accumulator (132) spaced hydraulically apart from the first low pressure accumulator by the secondary brake module (see FIG. 1), each of the first and second low pressure accumulators being operative to selectively regulate hydraulic fluid for a corresponding first or second pair of wheel brakes (see ¶¶ 0159, 0215; FIG. 1).
Claims 8, 10, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnishi et al. (US 2014/0026557) and Knechtges et al. (US 2015/0314686), as applied to claim 1, above, and further in view of Roll et al. (US 2016/0039398).
Regarding claim 8, Ohnishi discloses a first normally open bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the first traction control iso valve and a front brake of the first pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), and including a second normally open bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the second traction control iso valve and a front brake of the second pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1).
Ohnishi does not disclose that each of the first and second bypass iso valves has a larger orifice size than an orifice size of the iso valve the corresponding iso/dump control valve arrangement.
Roll teaches a brake system for actuating a plurality of wheel brakes (see Abstract, FIG. 1) comprising a bypass iso valve (22-25) for each wheel and an iso/dump control valve arrangement (18-21, 26-29), wherein each of the bypass iso valves (22-25) has a larger orifice size than an orifice size of the iso valve of the corresponding iso/dump control valve arrangement (see ¶ 0067, “check valve 23 . . . often has a significantly larger cross section than the orifice in the inlet valve”).
It would have been obvious to configure the iso bypass valve of Ohnishi to have a larger orifice size than the corresponding iso valve to ensure the quick release of brake pressure through the bypass valve when desired.
Regarding claim 10, Ohnishi discloses that each of the first and second bypass iso valves is configured to open responsive to higher hydraulic fluid pressure on an upstream (i.e., closer to the master cylinder) side of the bypass valve (see ¶ 0158).
Regarding claim 11, Ohnishi discloses that each of the first and second bypass iso valves includes a check valve mechanism selectively permitting fluid flow therethrough (see ¶ 0158).
Claims 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnishi et al. (US 2014/0026557) and Knechtges et al. (US 2015/0314686), as applied to claim 1, above, and further in view of Ganzel (US 2022/0274576). Note that the subject matter of claims 12 and 15 are not supported by the provisional application 63/580,048, to which priority is claimed. As such, claims 12 and 15 have a priority date of September 26, 2023.
Regarding claim 12, Ohnishi discloses that a first bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the first traction control iso valve and a front brake of the first pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), and including a second bypass iso valve (122) hydraulically interposed between the second traction control iso valve and a front brake of the second pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1).
Ohnishi does not disclose that each of the first and second bypass iso valves is a same iso valve type as is the iso valve of the iso/dump control valve arrangement.
Ganzel teaches a brake system for actuating a plurality of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1, Abstract), comprising first and second bypass valves (144A, 144C) (see FIG. 1), wherein each of the first and second bypass iso valves is a same iso valve type as is the iso valve of the iso/dump control valve (142A, 142C) arrangement (see FIGS. 5, 6; ¶ 0046).
It would have been obvious to configure the bypass valve to be of the same type as the iso/dump control valve to allow the bypass valve to be selectively opened by a control unit, thereby increasing the operational capability of the bypass valve.
Regarding claim 15, Ohnishi does not disclose the constructional details of the bypass iso valves.
Ganzel teaches a brake system for actuating a plurality of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1, Abstract), comprising first and second bypass valves (144A, 144C) (see FIG. 1) wherein the first and second bypass iso valves each include: an MC passage (506) in fluid communication with a corresponding first or second MC output (see ¶ 0046); a brake-side passage (508) in fluid communication with a corresponding front wheel brake (see ¶ 0046); a longitudinally extending bypass valve sleeve (see FIG. 5, sleeve surrounding armature (512) and body (504)); a bypass valve body (504) having longitudinally spaced first and second body ends (see FIG. 5) with a bypass body lumen extending therebetween (see FIG. 5, lumen houses spring (514) and tappet (510)), the bypass valve body spacing at least a portion of the bypass valve sleeve (see FIG. 5), at least partially surrounding the first body end, away from at least the brake-side passage (see FIG. 5), located adjacent the second body end (see FIG. 5); a bypass armature (512) located within the bypass valve sleeve adjacent the first body end (see FIG. 5); a bypass tappet (512) at least partially surrounded by the bypass armature and the bypass valve sleeve (see FIG. 5), the bypass tappet extending at least partially through the bypass body lumen (see FIG. 5), the bypass tappet being selectively moved longitudinally within the bypass body lumen toward the bypass valve body via energization of the bypass armature (see ¶ 0046); and a bypass valve seat (518) carried by a bypass seat body located directly adjacent the second body end (see FIG. 5); wherein a bypass valve fluid path extends through a selected one of the MC passage and the brake-side passage, past the bypass valve seat, through at least one laterally extending side aperture in the bypass valve body through at least a portion of the bypass body lumen, and through the other one of the MC passage and the brake-side passage (see FIG. 5); and wherein the bypass tappet selectively engages with the bypass valve seat to substantially occlude the bypass valve fluid path responsive to energization of the bypass armature moving the bypass tappet toward the second body end (see FIG. 5; ¶ 0046).
It would have been obvious to utilize the construction of the bypass iso valve of Ganzel for the bypass iso valves of Ohnishi to utilize a known construction that is suitable for use as a brake bypass valve (see e.g. Ganzel, ¶ 0046) in addition to allowing the bypass valve to be selectively opened by a control unit, thereby increasing the operational capability of the bypass valve.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record does not disclose the brake system of claim 1 in combination with the low pressure accumulator as recited in claim 16.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J LANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5988. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-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.
/NICHOLAS J LANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
April 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights